# $150 tablet may narrow digital divide



## Rob Pearson (Jul 10, 2003)

Now this is what I'm talking about... Tablets running the Andriod OS at a lot less of a cost than an iPad. $10 says they get better WiFi reception .. haha.



> (CNN) -- It's not as fancy as an iPad, but it's far more affordable: Kmart's July 25 circular advertised a 7-inch tablet by Augen running the Android operating system.
> 
> The GenTouch78 is on sale through July 31 for $149.99.
> 
> ...


http://www.cnn.com/2010/TECH/mobile/07/29/android.tablet.gahran/index.html

In all seriousness though, I think this is great step into a new market. I don't know how great that product is and I'm not saying to go out and get one, but I definitely can't wait to see more low cost tablets like this on the market.

I just got my mom a smart phone (LG Ally) that runs the Andriod OS. The previous cell phone she had was a normal flip phone with the carriers OS. It was capable of texting and mobile internet but my mom had the hardest time even remembering how to add contacts. Since I got my mom the Ally she's started texting and playing around on the internet looking up different things. I had given her a laptop to use for internet, but she's actually playing on her phone more since she got it then she has ever used the laptop. She says it's just more convenient and she's not afraid of breaking it, which is what I find most people that aren't tech savvy are most afraid of when it comes to starting to use a computer.


----------



## JohnWill (Oct 19, 2002)

The computer is the least of most folks issues, it's the ISP access that's the sticking point. This device requires WiFi access, how many people are going to have free public WiFi in their home?


----------



## TechGuy (Feb 12, 1999)

Sounds like a cool device, but I agree that it needs to have a cellular option. I'm sure it won't take long.


----------



## Rob Pearson (Jul 10, 2003)

Stick a wireless router in their house with basic cable service that's always on, they simply pick up the tablet and can play when they want to in there house. No need for spending all the extra money on a cell contract with tiered data plans and a fancy iPad. The people they're marketing aren't looking for something like that. Something more low end that they can probably go ahead and bundle with an existing service they already have (phone->dsl, cable, etc).


----------



## JohnWill (Oct 19, 2002)

Anyone that is forced to buy a $150 sub-standard computer will be very unlikely to be able to afford even basic cable Internet and a wireless router.


----------



## namenotfound (Apr 30, 2005)

JohnWill said:


> The computer is the least of most folks issues, it's the ISP access that's the sticking point. This device requires WiFi access, *how many people are going to have free public WiFi in their home?*


Everyone?

It's 2010, not 1910. Get a wireless router, connect it to your broadband, bingo you have Wi-Fi


----------



## JohnWill (Oct 19, 2002)

Like I said, if you're forced to consider this toy computer as opposed to a very nice $400-500 laptop, what's the chance you're paying $30-40/month for broadband? Sorry, this simply doesn't compute!


----------



## namenotfound (Apr 30, 2005)

$29.95/month for me!

And I'm sure not everyone who will buy it will be "forced" to. I might consider buying it as an accessory for doing light web surfing while in bed or in my pool (on floating chair).


----------



## JohnWill (Oct 19, 2002)

You can have a netbook for $250 with a real keyboard, why in the world would you want this piece of junk?


----------



## Squashman (Apr 4, 2003)

I read the reviews on this last week because BratDawg was thinking of getting one. It has a resistive touch screen and only comes with 2GB of memory. There is so much crap pre-loaded on it that you only have 200 MB's of space left on it when you turn it on for the first time. So you still have to spend money to get a useable SD card to store any type of multimedia files on it.

I do kind of like the smaller size of it then the iPad. I think the iPad is not as portable as it could be. But with the resistive touch screen and small amount of memory I am not touching this thing with a 10 foot pole.

I personally think Apple dropped the ball on the iPad as well. It could be a great device for displaying presentations for teachers if only you could project the display to a larger screen. Teachers could walk free around the classroom and teach from the iPad.


----------



## JohnWill (Oct 19, 2002)

Apple caters to the Apple groupies, practicality is not an issue.


----------



## namenotfound (Apr 30, 2005)

JohnWill said:


> You can have a netbook for $250 with a real keyboard, why in the world would you want this piece of junk?


A netbook that I have to hold in my lap so I can type on the keyboard, making it very likely that I drop it in the water (if used in my pool) vs. something I can hold with one hand, because it has a touch screen I can use with one finger.

Wow that's a hard one...


----------



## JohnWill (Oct 19, 2002)

Gee, you pick one unlikely scenario and type with one finger and declare the winner. 

When I'm using a browser, I like a real keyboard, some of us actually can touch type with more than one finger.  Enjoy your cheap toy, I'll use a real computer.


----------



## namenotfound (Apr 30, 2005)

Actually I'd rather use Apple's $500 iPad 
The screen is larger.


----------



## JohnWill (Oct 19, 2002)

Another cheap toy only it's not cheap.


----------



## namenotfound (Apr 30, 2005)

When it comes to the iPad, what a lot of people are failing to understand is that it's not a computer. People keep comparing it to a computer, so that's why you often hear people say "it's useless," "it's underpowered," or in your case "it's a toy."

But really, it's a giant iPod touch, and that's why people like it. I love my iPod touch, use it every day for basic web surfing when away from my computer; such as when I'm lounging by the pool or in the living room watching a movie and I want to quickly look something up online. Having that larger screen makes it easier to navigate online.

It's more of a recreational device, rather than a production device.

I'm assuming the same is true for the cheaper, smaller, tablet this topic is about. I view it more for recreational web surfing. I'm not going to use it for anything heavy. You can't even compare the two, because they're designed for two completely different things.


----------



## JohnWill (Oct 19, 2002)

Well, this is being billed as a device to narrow the digital divide, and I maintain it's not up to the task.  Hell, I'd like one just to play with, but I wouldn't try to use it for anything serious.


----------

