Measuring up: The FlatPad A10 is shown on the right, next to an Apple iPad.
Credit: Technology Review
Computing
The FlatPad A10: A Flawed iPad Competitor
The Chinese-made tablet falls short, highlighting problems with the Android ecosystem.
- Tuesday, September 14, 2010
- By Simson Garfinkel
The FlatPad A10 looks a lot like an Apple iPad, with the same black bezel and single circular button at the bottom of the screen. But the A10 costs only $220, compared to $499 for the cheapest (16-gigabyte, Wi-Fi-only) iPad. The A10 is also has a slot for more memory (micro-SD format); and most importantly, the A10 runs Google's open source Android operating system, making it one of the first Android-based tablets available for sale in the U.S.
The A10's specifications make it seem like a strong competitor to the iPad. This Android 2.1 device has a 10.2-inch touch screen. It has 256 megabits of RAM and two gigabytes of built-in flash. There's Wi-Fi and an Ethernet port, two USB ports (one for programming the A10, one for connecting other devices), and built-in stereo speakers. It's got a one-gigahertz processor, an accelerometer to detect screen orientation, and runs Google Maps. The battery lasts five hours.
But make no mistake, the A10 is no iPad. Manufactured in China by Zenithink and imported by Texas-based Flat Computing, the A10 lacks the quality and the software/hardware integration largely responsible for the iPad's success.
But while it's easy to dismiss the A10 as a knockoff, I think it's better to examine this device as an early prototype that points to a possible future of tablet-based devices--and to a set of growing problems inside the Android ecology. These issues will need to be addressed if other recently announced Android-powered tablets--Samsung's Galaxy, Toshiba's Folio 100, and ViewSonic's ViewPad 7--are to be successful.
Despite looking a lot like an iPad, the A10's hardware falls short in several important ways. Whereas the iPad's screen is 1024 by 768 pixels, the A10's is 1024 by 600, and it turns out that those extra 168 pixels matter a lot. Instead of the iPad's multitouch capacitive screen, the A10 has a resistive screen that works much better with a fingernail (or a pen cap) than with a fingertip. The screen lacks the brightness, clarity, and color of the iPad's, presumably because Apple gets the best screen available to justify the iPad's high price, while Zenithink bought a much cheaper touch screen. Yes, the A10 has stereo speakers, but they sound no better than the "stereo" speakers on many cell phones. The iPad's mono sound port actually sounds much better. Even with my high-end headset, music sounds cheap and tinny on the A10.
The A10's lack of software integration is borderline comical. For example, when the A10 turns on, it says that there is "No Service," and the little cell phone indicator says that there are no bars--not surprising, since there is no cell phone chip inside. Zenithink appears to have used unmodified Android telephone software for this device. Like the iPad, the A10 has a black circular button with an outlined square, but the button is hooked up to Android's "back" feature, not "home." There is a rocker switch that looks like the iPad's volume control, but the left rocker actually makes the Android menu appear, while the right rocker displays a list of currently running applications.
Even though it's running Android, Google doesn't let the A10 or any other of today's tablet computers download Apps from the Android Marketplace. That's because the Marketplace blocks devices that don't meet minimum hardware standards--standards designed for cell phones. This will probably change when Google or one of its official hardware partners starts selling tablets for mainstream use. Until then, the only way to run Marketplace on the A10 is to grab the device ID from a real Android phone and program it into your A10, a complicated procedure that requires significant skill.
- 1
- 2
Related Articles
Google Places Two Bets on a Post-PC World
The latest Android tablets and Chromebooks suggest different "post-PC" worlds, both more complicated than the one Apple is going for.
The Year in Mobile
Apple invented a new category of mobile device, consumers want faster connections, and the spectrum is more crowded than ever.
Can Samsung's Tablet Hold Its Own?
Samsung hopes the Galaxy will compete with the iPad through carriers and content.
rsole
4 Comments
- 979 Days Ago
- 09/14/2010
Probably the hardware of the chinese tablet is much worse that Apple hardware (BTW, manufactured in Cina too). But neither the price, it cost less than a half!
But the most misleading of the article is the defence of "Apple integration". Apple is not integrating systems, it just locking in customer to its technology. Integrating means easing access to different vendors. Lock in menas "you only can buy from me".
Consumers in the XX1th should already have learnt that.
ViewRoyal
1 Comment
- 979 Days Ago
- 09/14/2010
Re: "But the most misleading of the article is the defence of "Apple integration". Apple is not integrating systems"
The word "integrate" means to "combine (one thing) with another so that they become a whole". So yes, this is exactly what Apple is doing. The iPad's hardware, operating system, iTunes, and App Store are all integrated through common development by Apple.
Being ignorant of the definitions of words only makes your arguments less credible ;-)
byronic
2 Comments
- 979 Days Ago
- 09/14/2010
It sounds to me like you have bought in to the shallow argument that "open" means better, without really understanding the issues.
Apple makes their products work together - in a manner which is the envy, not just of one industry, but of every industry.
When you buy an iPad you buy into an environment which offers a multitude of applications developed by individual entrepreneurs. Apple supports these people by providing them with a seamless market for their products, and fantastic developer tools.
Anyone who wants to can develop an app for the iPad. Apple also review and test all apps, so you know if it is on the appstore it works; doesn't contain malicious code and offers something worthwhile.
Of course you can jailbreak your device if you want to run something on it which is not available on the appstore. Some people do. Most don't bother.
And, of course, the iPad/iPhone OS is built on Darwin - an open-source flavour of Unix.
You have a car? Does it run on olive oil? Do you complain that you are locked in to the oil companies? You have a TV? Do you have cable TV? Not worried about being locked in to your cable company? The iPad offers open access to the net, and all the flavours of information which are offered on the net - except, of course, Flash - which doesn't yet run in a touch environment.
It is a fine line - Windows runs on any mix of hardware just about, but doesn't provide a good experience on any. Perhaps that is why the Mac is enjoying growth of 36% year on year...
The iPad is an appliance - on which you can run a gamut of apps, movies, TV shows, games...
Repeating mantras you have read somewhere without understanding what they mean is of no service to anyone reading your posts. Do a little more research, read a bit wider, and do some thinking. It may improve your posts...
eldernorm
2 Comments
- 979 Days Ago
- 09/14/2010
Very good reply.
" The iPad offers open access to the net, and all the flavours of information which are offered on the net - except, of course, Flash - which doesn't yet run in a touch environment."
Actually Mobile Flash 10 does not really run on mobile yet, generally. And now its a virus vehicle as well.
If one hates Apple, then anything else is better. Fine.
But many many people are finding out how nice Apple is.
Just a thought.
en
brinkwerks
1 Comment
- 978 Days Ago
- 09/15/2010
in re: flash and touchscreen/mobile, the WSJ interview of adobe's CEO just after Jobs' april rant provides an interesting counterpoint:
http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2010/04/29/live-blogging-the-journals-interview-with-adobe-ceo/tab/liveblog/
eldernorm, adobe's ceo claims that flash works with mobile and touchscreen.
but if this is not so, why not?
from another angle, i would consider that, if the prognosis for flash seems dismal and the app itself hated, yet adobe has made undeniable advances in other apps, such as with dreamweaver (html5, css3) and premiere pro (completely rebuilt for 64-bit workflow). if adobe is evil, then ripping them over flash is like bragging about cutting a snake off medusa's head. adobe's portfolio is too diverse.
in fact, last week (9/10/10), financial analysts were reporting that flash really only accounts for about 5% of adobe's revenue, and CS about 55%. the issue with flash isn't cash but control, so yes, iceberg-speed updates to flash risk its being left behind, but you know, something similar happened to microsoft back in 1996. they were late to market to compete with then-dominant browser netscape navigator (now firefox). and in spite of almost missing it, 14 years later, they hold over half the browser market. yes, i despise IE too, but facts are facts. and if adobe will get smart with flash dev as they've done with some of their other apps, who knows how the race will end?
steve used to get on famously with the guys at adobe. and then there was a time that steve was pooh-poohing tablets, too. some think steve's machiavellian hubris in shunning flash for W E B devices has more to do with him not being further humiliated over egregious battery life. but what do they know?
can i just take the gloves off for a second, MIT? would someone please explain to me: what is so cutting edge about 'this year's model' that doesn't display about half or more of 'this year's' web content? is that 'contemporary?' is that 'modern?' is that 'hip?' are all those blank flash frames 'elegant design?' world be damned, we won't allow flash, but we'll still brag about the online experience we're giving you.
meh.
and about flash being a virus magnet. religious apple users delight to point out apple's virus-freedom, but now that apple's cash pile is actually bigger than microsoft's, it's only a matter of time. think about what motivates hackers.
finally, to end this tirade on a note of levity, having just gotten off contract on the iphone, can't resist a dig on battery life, from 2:00 to 2:11:
http://www.theonion.com/video/apple-introduces-revolutionary-new-laptop-with-no,14299/
simsong
7 Comments
- 978 Days Ago
- 09/15/2010
Flash works just fine on my Nexus One running Android 2.2.
steffenjobbs
1 Comment
- 979 Days Ago
- 09/14/2010
Android users are happily willing to settle for less as long as they don't have to pay the price of an Apple product. That's just their nature. Always looking for a bargain and Android is the perfect bargain. It cost vendors nothing to stick it on any piece of crap hardware. I mean, an Android tablet that doesn't even access Google Marketplace? What kind of nonsense is that? I hope consumers that buy this dreck are aware of the fact that it's merely a poor imitation of an iPad and not the real deal.
rsanchez1
213 Comments
- 978 Days Ago
- 09/15/2010
Re: Suitable for Android users
What's with the knock on Android users? For phones, Androids have resulted in some pretty nice phones that, yes, are a bargain compared with iPhones. Sorry, but it is not in my nature to spend hundreds of dollars more than I need to spend. I guess that's the nature of Android users. I don't settle for less. Android is what I want.
However, I do agree with you that this little attempt in Android tablets is a failure. Having a cell phone indicator was quite laughable. When more reputable companies start selling Android tablets I expect better results.
simplycast
5 Comments
- 979 Days Ago
- 09/14/2010
Interesting !
mjtomlin
1 Comment
- 979 Days Ago
- 09/14/2010
First of all, I too can purchase and read books from Amazon on my iPad. I can also listen to music purchased from some other store other iTunes on my iPhone. These places all compete with Apple and yet I can still buy content from them and play them on Apple's devices.
Secondly, how exactly is Apple locking you into their technology? You mean the apps on my iPhone won't work on an Android phone? Well the reverse is true as well. Also, I can be perfectly happy owning an iPhone and never buying anything from iTunes or the AppStore. Yes there's only one place you can get native applications and Apple gate-keeps which applications are allowed in, but who cares as long as all the apps I need are available? However, web-based apps can be installed from any one's website. There's tons of apps built using HTML5, Javascript, and CSS that can be installed on my iOS devices without Apple's intervention.
rsanchez1
213 Comments
- 978 Days Ago
- 09/15/2010
You don't "install" web apps. Also, you can always jailbreak your iDevices.
samrod
10 Comments
- 974 Days Ago
- 09/19/2010
Actually, you can "install" web apps as icons onto the iOS desktop or springboard, launch and use them indistinguishably from native apps.
piperleanne
4 Comments
- 979 Days Ago
- 09/14/2010
I'm fairly certain any device running the Android OS is 'allowed' to carry the Android Apps Market. However, a license is required for the Apps Market and some companies may choose to forgo the added expense.
http://android-developers.blogspot.com/2010/09/brace-for-future.html
eldernorm
2 Comments
- 979 Days Ago
- 09/14/2010
So, "However, a license is required for the Apps Market and some companies may choose to forgo the added expense. " --- does that mean that they are cheap and the customer gets stuck with not being able to fully use the phone???
I always thought that if something does not work..... it does not really matter why, it DOES NOT WORK..!!!! So your Android phone on 1.6 is STUCK there unless the cell carrier decides (locked in) to upgrade. Sounds locked in to me.
Just a thought,
en
rsanchez1
213 Comments
- 977 Days Ago
- 09/16/2010
That's why consumers need to be smart about what they purchase. The iPhone/iPad devices have their reputation because of Apple's closed environment. Android is an open system that any carrier/manufacturer can implement on their devices, so consumers need a little more education to purchase an Android device. They need to know the manufacturer, what features they offer, how often they upgrade, etc.
piperleanne
4 Comments
- 973 Days Ago
- 09/20/2010
Actually, it does mean the company is cheap. There are a lot of Chinese vendors selling inexpensive Android "devices", without an Android Apps Market on them. Not because they are not compliant with the OS standards, but because they can't sell their devices for $50 if they paid the license to carry the market.
simsong
7 Comments
- 978 Days Ago
- 09/15/2010
Why are you certain that any Android device is allowed to access the Android market?
piperleanne
4 Comments
- 973 Days Ago
- 09/20/2010
I didn't say any device is allowed, in the sense you appear to have read it. I said any Android device is permitted to carry the Android Apps Market, as long as the manufacturer or carrier pays a licensing fee. My point being, there is no hard and fast rule against a tablet carrying the Apps Market just because its specs are not in-line with Android 2.1.
sihanat
5 Comments
- 978 Days Ago
- 09/15/2010
forget ipads and tablets, they don't have the same computing power as laptops or notebooks and considering the cost of the Ipad, you might of well buy somthing more productive like a notebook.
chrisbee78
1 Comment
- 977 Days Ago
- 09/16/2010
I am not calling Apple a bad product maker as I own a few myself but I find that too many Apple Fanboys will always defend Apple and not look into true detail.
Apple has not made a device YET that has HDMI, USB. Their Camera features lack tremendously with bad lighting and no LED flash. Doesn't support word, excel, etc files. Also they have no flash player. Also for a developer to release an application they must pay $99 to APPLY(which means you may not get approved- Can be dangerous but comments and ratings always help)
"Apple has also made it easy for iPhone, iPad, and iPod Touch users to keep their system software up-to-date."
This is NOT true as all my products from an APPLE STORE I have had to install an update after first getting.
Android SOMETIMES lacks in display but when I'm using my phone I don't expect HD TV or something. This A10 is a joke but thats because this is the FIRST time there has been movement for this and Apple had been working on the iPad for years. Applications are actually just as good on the Android system and just because there was issues with the one product does not mean it is an Android issue.
First you need to realize that most systems are not just straight android and are Android + some kind of User Interface. So this little twist they put on the A10 does not mean its an Android issue. Also a side note developers do not have to pay a cent to develop an application and put it on the market.
iTunes was only such a big hit because it was the FIRST softwares to be unique to a certain device aka the iPod.
So to say that Android lacks is a lie both are equal and both have flaws so welcome to life.
rsanchez1
213 Comments
- 976 Days Ago
- 09/17/2010
You hit the nail exactly on the head. When something is wrong with an iPhone, you can rightly say it's an iPhone issue because the iOS only comes with iPhones. When something is wrong with your phone running Android, you can't exactly say it's an Android issue, since many different manufacturers are using Android as the basis for their phones (and in this case, tablet).
This A10 is a joke, but the company that made it doesn't have a reputation for quality. I don't know about you guys, but before this story I had never heard of Zenithink or Flat Computing. This is just the first step for Android-based tablets, and as better companies start developing Android-based tablets, you'll see better quality Android tablets. It's not a problem with the Android ecosystem, it's a problem with how manufacturers choose to interface with that system.
Muttz
1 Comment
- 974 Days Ago
- 09/19/2010
I will probably order one of these things. Why? Because I want to mess with it and play around with development in the Android environment.
When the iPads came out, I wasn't really interested. I didn't know what I would do with one. I already have an iPhone, a netbook and a notebook. I will probably never jailbreak the iPhone because I got rid of my landline. If I brick it, I'm stuck with Skype. And, I'm NOT going to start playing around with a $500 - $900 iPad. I would be very upset if I hopelessly bricked it.
The FlatPad is $200 including shipping. That's still not small change if it breaks, but not devastating. A community has already sprung up and they are developing custom ROMS and scripts to access the Android marketplace, etc.
This is not a mainstream product nor is it an iPad replacement. It's a geek toy. I know exactly what I am getting into.
Flat Computing is announcing a new tablet tomorrow (Sept. 20), so I am waiting to see what it is. If it's a lot more than $200, I will get the rebranded Zenithink.
wut
5 Comments
- 974 Days Ago
- 09/19/2010
Excuse me, but why include "The Chinese-made tablet" in the subtitle of the article when the iPad is ALSO a "Chinese-made-tablet" (like the vast majority of other computers and electronics, both Apple and non-Apple)?
The subtext of such an inclusion smacks of ignorance.
On Twitter
Become a Fan on Facebook
Subscribe to the Feed
memito
47 Comments
Open is better
The A10 is clearly a device that does not meet the standards to compete with the devices we are used to in the US. However, I disagree with the author's evangelization of a one-stop shop for music, videos etc.
For example, in my Galaxy S, I have no problem using Amazon for my mp3 music and B&A for my books. Usability is fine, and the openess means Amazon and B&A have to fight for my dollars instead of taking me for granted.
Reply
byronic
2 Comments
Re: Open is better
You can buy music for an iPad or iPhone from anywhere, including a CD store. You can buy e-books from anywhere, not just Apple's bookstore, and including Amazon.
Did you buy your Android phone believing otherwise? Perhaps a bit more research before you buy your next device might help you make a better decision...
Reply
simsong
7 Comments
Re: Open is better
I bought an android phone because I think that the AT&T family plans are too expensive. But I agree that the difficulty of downloading music for Android phones is another serious problem that they have.
Reply