Seth Weintraub writing for CNNMoney.com wonders if Steve Jobs distorted the truth during his iPad 2 announcement.  He starts by trying to examine Job’s “First dual core tablet to ship in volume” comment.

“First dual core tablet to ship in volume.” That’s funny, I tested a Dell (DELL) Streak 7, which had a dual core Nvidia Tegra 2 chip in January. They’ve been shipping ever since on T-Mobile.

In volume.

Of course, the Motorola (MMI) XOOM also has this same dual core processor and is certainly shipping in volume as well. In fact, I’ve been using an Android phone (the Atrix) with a dual core chip for weeks and it wasn’t the first to ship in volume.  As for Apple (AAPL), they haven’t shipped one iPad 2 yet — iPad 2’s hit shelves on March 11.

Seth isn’t the only one to latch onto this quote and try to debunk it but what a lot of people are failing to realize is that, while others may be shipping dual-core tablets, it’s very safe for Steve Jobs to say that Apple will ship and sell a higher volume of iPad 2’s than any other dual-core tablet available today simply based on sales of the first iPad.  Indeed, if previous iPad sales are any indication at all, iPad 2 is going to be a huge hit. What other tablet device can claim that today?

And to say that Apple hasn’t shipped any iPads is completely naive.  Apple has a stock pile of second generation either en-route to stores or in stores already.  This is very common for any product.

Seth also tries to pick apart Jobs’ “>90% market share” bullet point.

Apple would have needed to sell 3.2 million more to reach 90% of 2010’s tablet market share against just Samsung alone (in triple the time).  That’s not including all of the Android-powered Nooks out there, those cheap $100 Androids you can buy at Walgreens or Amazon and even Windows-powered Tablet PCs (which are mentioned two bullet points above!).  If you choose to include the Kindle, Apple may not have even reached 50% of the market.

While he might have a point about the actual market share number his supporting arguments are just ridiculous.  First, the sales of “cheap $100 Androids” don’t even register, to the point where nobody is actually tracking them.  Second, there is no such thing as a Windows powered Tablet PC when you consider how tablets have come to be defined because of the iPad.  Nobody is selling a Windows powered tablet.  And last, attempting to bring in Kindle sales simply doesn’t make sense as the Kindle is a reading device, not a general purpose tablet device.  Talk about skewing data in your favor.  “Pot, meet kettle.”

Seth goes on to point out hardware specs and pricing.

Perhaps Jobs could have also compared the iPad 2 to other Android tablets’ prices? Samsung’s Galaxy Tab and Dell’s Streak both now start at $499 and have better cameras, 3G radios and GPS, which seem to compete well with Apple’s $499 Wifi-only offering.  Reality distorted.

Know why the Tab and the Streak both now start at $499?  Because they’re not selling.

But hey the XOOM has better specs right?

But then consider that the XOOM has a much better, bigger 720P+ screen compared to the iPad’s 1024×768 job (it has less Retina™).

Where Seth wants to pick on Jobs’ use of the word “volume” saying it is subjective, so to is saying the XOOM’s screen is “much better.”  The iPad’s screen is an IPS panel giving it a much wider viewing angle where as the XOOM does not.  While it is true that the XOOM has a 720p display Seth, like so many other reviewers and Apple nay-sayers, fails to realize is that the iPad’s 4:3 format display makes much more sense than a 16:9 display format.  By giving a tablet a 16:9 display format you’ve essentially limited the device to a horizontal layout.  The iPads 4:3 format allows developers to create apps that favor either layout and still get good use from it.  Remember, the iPad is a general purpose device, not just some common movie player.

The only thing Seth got right in his troll piece is that Jobs misquoted Samsung’s CEO.

Microsoft is at it again. They’re making wild claims about having a number of iPad killers at 2011’s CES based on their Windows 7 OS. I really hope that they came up with a way to make Windows 7 more appropriate for a tablet.

But after reading this I dare say they haven’t

The Times, citing unnamed sources, said the Samsung devices would be “similar in size and shape” to the iPad, but not as thin and equipped with a slide-out keyboard.

A slide-out keyboard?! Are f&($ing kidding me? Congratulations, you just made a more cumbersome laptop

Linux News is reporting that Acer will be launching two new Android tablets, both a 7″ and 10.1″ model, as well as a Windows 7 based tablet. I asked the magic 8 ball and it is already saying “outlook not so good.” Even the “experts” who cover this stuff already know that whatever Acer pumps out simply won’t match the iPad.

“The price point is the only way for other tablets to compete against the iPad for now, as it’s very difficult to battle the iPad in terms of the user experience,” Kitagawa explained. “But if the price is lower than the iPad’s, and the user experience is good enough, buyers might be attracted.”

That’s not exactly praise being dished out there now it is?

I’d really like to see more companies compete with the iPad by actually offering a compelling product. Samsung’s Tab is so far about the only Android based offering that even stands a chance but even that tablet comes up short. It kinda reminds me of a certain Dilbert cartoon

Dilbert.com

And we all know how I feel about Windows 7 on a tablet. That has #fail all over it.

Been a lot of rumors flying about that the Macbook Air is finally getting an update. The Air hasn’t gotten a meaningful update in quite a while and is currently the only laptop model from Apple that doesn’t have a the large multitouch trackpad. Rumors include an 11 and 13″ sku and SSD only. AppleInsider has the details at http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/10/10/16/more_details_surface_on_apples_next_generation_macbook_airs.html.

Came across this article talking about progress being made with the new Apple TV in regards to jailbreaking and adding new functionality. Jailbreaking was recently ruled as legal. I think this is a big win for consumers who want to be able to use their hardware devices for whatever they want. For example, I think it’s ridiculous that Apple is allowed to force me to join their developer program if I want to write my own iOS application for a device I own. It’s perfectly reasonable that if I want to distribute my software using their App Store platform but beyond that I should be faced with such restrictions.

Also, just because jailbreaking has been deemed legal doesn’t mean pirating software is suddenly legal as well. There are still plenty of other existing laws protecting against that. In the next few months or years I think we’ll see additional clarifications with the DMCA and jailbreaking. For example, although the iPhone was specifically mentioned in the ruling, I actually don’t think it should be ok to jailbreak an iPhone for security reasons as it pertains to the cell phone network. The iPhone is part of a bigger infrastructure that is not owned and operated by the owner of the phone and in that case it’s a lot like a business PC being connected to a business network. At the same however, such a ruling will hopefully coerce Apple into providing a toggle on the phone allowing end users to install software outside of the App Store. This would satisfy what some end users want while still protecting the security of the cellular network.

Apple announced yesterday that they will be streaming their September 1 event live. The catch? It’ll only work in Safari on Mac and on iOS devices. So in other words, only about 9/10’s of the internet will be able to view the live stream.

But that 9/10’s of the internet will be able to enjoy the exact same video stream no matter what device they are on, be it laptop or the tiny iPod touch. No need for a desktop optimized version and no need for a mobile optimized version. The same stream will play on any sized device.

Make no mistake, this is a giant stab at anyone who is arguing that flash is needed on Apple’s devices. If you need any further information about the state flash on Android you need only watch the video here and then read the comments. People love to rail on Apple while completely missing the point that having flash at all doesn’t mean flash works and a half-assed flash experience is not what Apple is willing to allow on their devices. Reading through the comments you’ll find a few people who argue that “at least it is there” and that “it doesn’t matter that flash sucks today because there are better phones coming out tomorrow.” That makes no sense.

Since Steve Jobs came back to Apple there has been one thing Apple has done that nobody can really argue. Innovation in the PC industry. While everyone, including Apple at the time, was producing boring looking beige computers Apple decided to completely rethink how a computer can look and introduced iMac. Love it or hate it, the iMac was completely different than anything else at the time and soon other manufacturers tried to add some amount of flair to their PC lineup.

Skip a head a few years later and Apple did it again. While everyone else was basically creating incrementally different smart phones in 2007, Apple simply destroyed how everyone assumed a smart phone should look and work by bringing to market iPhone. They made it far easier, intuitive and beautiful and from that moment on, they made it so that any phone on the market that didn’t have a touch screen or had a touch screen that required the use of a stylus was simply awkward and outdated.

Apple’s most recent market disruption was none other than iPad. During the summer prior to iPad’s release the netbook craze was in full swing. Just a year later there are reports that sales on netbooks have slowed considerably and some reports even show netbooks are losing out because of iPad.

At iPads reveal in January of 2010 Steve Jobs quipped that netbooks weren’t better at anything, they were simply cheaper laptops. Many people argued that netbooks were most useful for consumption and were never really meant for creating content. Yet netbooks looked and worked just like any other ordinary PC. Apple changed this by creating something that looked and worked nothing like a PC. Note too that iPad was the first tablet device on the market. Microsoft has been trying to get consumers using tablet PCs for years but I don’t think anyone could argue they’ve been anything near the run away success that Apple has seen basically over night.

The inspiration for my post comes from Marco Arment’s recent post. He also poses the interesting question of, “How do you think the subcompact, inexpensive computer category will look in three years?”

I just can’t get over some of the stuff on Microsoft’s PC vs Mac argument page. Some of it is true, like the lack of Blu-Ray support. This is something that really irritates me about the Mac platform. Some of the other stuff is just simply stretching it such as the following:

Working smoothly.

Things just don’t work the same way on Macs if you’re used to a PC. For example, the mouse works differently. And many of the shortcuts you’re familiar with don’t work the same way on a Mac.

This statement really makes me want to wipe OS X off my laptop and install Windows 7, it really does. Then again, it really is amazing how I managed to adapt to the mouse and keyboard shortcuts.

But in the end, the thing that really makes me scratch my head is why the page exists at all, or rather, why it’s just so thin on real reasons to use Windows 7. Yes, Apple has been running a negative ad campaign for years poking fun at Microsoft and most of the time I thought they really did hit some of the weak points in Windows. Despite all of that, Apple still openly advertises that you can run Windows on a Mac and they even go so far as to provide the tools to do so. Their tools resize the OS X partition, create a new one for Windows and provide all of the drivers needed to get Windows running. You can then dual boot your Mac system between OS X and Windows. Point is, they’re not afraid to admit that sometimes a person really might want or need to run Windows for whatever function and they provide the tools to do so. Microsoft should be playing on this and attempting to convince people that they need Windows for whatever reason and that a Mac’s can also be a great PC.

Instead we have Microsoft making some incredibly weak arguments on how Windows 7 is superior to the OS X. Some of them are valid and some of them are simply wrong. Either way, Microsoft is primarily a software company and they shouldn’t be pissing on a potential platform. Microsoft has had Office on OS X for years but lets face it, it lags behind the Windows version and has never felt like a proper Mac application. The current 2008 version is incredibly slow even on the latest Macs. While Office 2011 may be set to change that it’s just too early to tell.