Apple News, Analysis and Podcasts

  RIM has a video up on their YouTube channel showing that the iPad is slower than the Playbook in browser performance. Now, I would like to go and look at this playbook and see how it compares, but the Playbook is not available. Basically it is still vaporware, so until RIM actually starts selling this Playbook, it really does not matter. Now the Playbook is supposed to come out sometime in the second quarter 2011 and have a sub $500 price. We should really wait until RIM has a shipping Playbook before performance tests are conducted. It would be better for RIM just to demo the cool new features instead of trying challenge their competitors with vaporware products.
   The tests do seem accurate on my ipad, although I find it interesting that the Playbook is being compared to a current generation iPad. When we know that a new version of the iPad is coming out sometime in first quarter of 2011. From the tests, RIM is only comparing the browsers and not any of the other applications. They don’t show battery life either. All of the test shown in the video are performance based tests except for the Acid3, which test web standards. It is expected that the Playbook, with its 1GHz ARM processor, would bet the old iPad. As far as the Acid test goes, Safari mobile may not be pixel accurate, but Safari for the mac is. I am sure by the time the Playbook ever comes out, Safari Mobile will be just as good as the Playbook. The Playbook uses webkit for browser rendering, which is the same as Safari and Chrome. I don’t see an advantage here for RIM.
   Does RIM think Apple will not update their iPad before the Playbook comes out? No, they know a new version of the iPad is coming out soon. They need to show some advantage over the iPad, so they better do it now, with the first generation model. It certainly will not be screen size, as the Playbook looks tiny compared to the iPad. They know, when the second generation comes out, they won’t have an advantage. They released this demo in hopes it will prevent people from buying iPad and waiting for the Playbook if it ever comes out. I guess RIM needs to trick consumers in buying a Playbook instead of an iPad. Why not just build a better product?
   They may have demoed the browser, but what about some of the other applications that will be available. Did they demo any of those? So RIM tried to find something that the Playbook an advantage of over the iPad, and this was it? They could only find faster browser performance and Acid3 tests as the best advantages for the Playbook, a vaporware product, over a first generation iPad? It does not look good for the Playbook, they may need more time.
   As you can see, the Playbook is no iPad killer. Just like the Samsung Tab is no iPad killer. If a real iPad competitor does emerge, it will need to dominate these hopefuls in order to get enough developers on board. Without developers, a tablet is dead in the water. Tablets need developers far move than smart phones do. My guess Android will be the OS, but Android will not be tablet ready for at least another year. So we won’t see a true competitor for the iPad for at least another year. That gives a whole another year for Apple to keep improving their iOS. The longer Apple gets, the harder it will become to compete with them.

1 Comment

1. Don ~ November 17, 2010 15:56
   RIM's goal was not to sell Playbook. This is obvious since Playbook isn't available. Rather it was to instill Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt in the minds of people considering an iPad in an attempt to slow iPad's incredible sales momentum. In this, RIM is taking a page from Microsoft's old playbook: Someone comes out with fantastic competing software, MS says "we're coming out with it, too, only it will be faster, easier, and do more." Over the following months, features and claims vanish, but the purpose of spreading the FUD worked, slowing adoption of the competing product. You're correct. the comparison, in reality, is meaningless because their is no Playbook, only vapor hardware. The exercise by RIM is meaningless except to spread fear and try to slow Apple. It's best to ignore them, as Apple is doing, until they actually have a product which, by that time, will be dated and slow.

Leave your reply