Apple lowered the price of its refurbished original model iPads by $100 over the weekend, and all of these models get a brand new battery and outer shell before being resold, so you won’t be able to tell it isn’t a new device. Having purchased many refurbed Apple goods over the years I can tell you the quality of these products is usually indistinguishable from new. Prices for the refurbished iPads now range from $299 to $599, with each Wi-Fi model getting an additional $100 off their existing discounts, and Wi-Fi + 3G models knocking off $130 from the price of each.

Stock is bound to be limited, and there’s no telling how long Apple will be offering these prices. As of this writing, all storage capacity and connectivity options are still available.

At this price, I’m considering picking up a basic model 16 GB refurbished model as a dedicated development and testing device for my personal projects. Anyone else think this is too tempting to pass up?

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• The rise of tablets in the enterprise
• A Media Tablet Forecast, 2011 – 2015
• Why iPad 2 Will Lead Consumers Into the Post-PC Era

The reason Apple devices and those using Google’s mobile OS will be able to stay dominant is because both have a significant platform advantage: the availability of software and content from development and publishing partners. It’s an advantage that In-Stat thinks will be insurmountable for competitors, and the recent cautionary tale of HP’s TouchPad seem to back that assumption up.

The TouchPad's multitasking was one of its strengths but ultimately couldn't save it.

While many were impressed with webOS, the mobile operating system powering the TouchPad, and not offended by the hardware itself (which did have more in common with the original iPad than the current model, despite competing for consumers’ dollars with the newer Apple device), third-party developer support was severely lacking when compared to the iOS and Android ecosystems.

In-Stat also predicts that the overall tablet market will grow to 250 million shipments by 2017, up from around 17 million in 2010. New devices from Apple, Motorola, LG and HTC will help spur that growth, according to the report, as well as new devices from BlackBerry. It’s that last one I’m not so sure about. RIM’s PlayBook isn’t doing so hot so far, and we’ve heard that carrier support is eroding for the device, at least in the U.S. In-Stat even acknowledges that “wireless operator business models could have a tremendous impact on future tablet demand,” and I agree; subsidies will help non-Apple devices catch up. If RIM is already being locked out in that regard for poor performance, it seems unlikely that new tablet designs from the BlackBerry maker could turn the tide.

The PlayBook is a 7-inch device, a form factor outnumbered among tablets by larger screens.

One final highlight from the In-Stat report: The company predicts 9- to 11-inch devices to rule the roost, with 56 percent of the tablet market. I agree that larger screens will continue to beat out smaller devices, but I question whether it will even be that close of a race. As of yet, 7-inch devices haven’t really proved their viability: Samsung’s Galaxy Tab is the best-selling example, and it still doesn’t seem to have come close to the iPad’s numbers, even if you count shipments instead of sales.

I fully agree with In-Stat that the tablet market will expand by leaps and bounds in the next few years, and I also agree that iOS and Android will lead that expansion. But I’m not sure that Android will make up as much of that expansion as In-Stat suggests. Google is beset on all sides by patent claims that call in to question Android’s future, and it has yet to release a solid version of its mobile OS that really stands up well on tablet hardware. One thing’s for sure: Apple has a seat at the head of the tablet table, and that’s a very good place to be, if recent trends are any indication.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• The rise of tablets in the enterprise

When first unveiled by HP, the TouchPad showed a lot of promise, thanks in large part to the slick tablet-optimized version of webOS that powered it. Our own Kevin Tofel was genuinely impressed with the TouchPad in his testing of the device.

But it was also obviously not a runaway hit yet for HP. Reports suggested that it was selling only somewhere around 10 percent of its stock at Best Buy locations, and HP instituted two big price drops already for the TouchPad even though it has only been on the market for two months. Apple’s iPads, in contrast, haven’t seen a price drop prior to a new model being introduced.

New numbers released Thursday revealed that world tablet sales are growing, even without the iPad included in those figures. But it’s not clear that the TouchPad helped spur any of that increase. And for HP, it’s likely that even a moderately successful device wouldn’t have generated acceptable margins at the price point it was eventually forced to set for the TouchPad. It’s still possible HP will attempt to license webOS to third-party hardware makers, but it can’t instill confidence in those device manufacturers that HP itself can’t make a go of it. Nor will developers be lining up to create software for the platform without a clear future for it.

Gartner didn’t see webOS as a significant threat to Apple’s tablet market share in the immediate future, predicting HP would take only three percent of the overall market by 2015, despite being one of only a handful of potentially viable competitors in play. The only true competitors to the iPad are Android tablets, and even those aren’t doing too well just yet, since tablet shipments overall from all manufacturers and platforms besides Apple only reach 5.6 million last quarter. Apple is also making headway against Android tablets in court, which may help it stay out in front of the crowd of Google-backed devices for a while longer. After Android, the only other major alternative is the BlackBerry PlayBook, and we all know that device is on shaky ground at best.

One thing’s for sure: Calling any bets regarding the tablet game is a sucker’s bet right now. HP and RIM have both performed pretty poorly using a unified hardware/software approach in coming up with iPad competitors. Add in Google purchasing Motorola, which might indicate that the Android-maker is on the verge of trying the same thing, and it’s clear the landscape for tablets is undergoing rapid and unpredictable change. Despite the upheaval, however, the iPad remains a surefire winner.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• The rise of tablets in the enterprise
• A Media Tablet Forecast, 2011 – 2015
• Mobile Q2: Smartphone growth surges; iPad’s rule continues

Some might consider it contentious to include tablets in mobile PC rankings, but there are a few reasons it makes sense. First, consider that the PC industry is experiencing negative growth, at least in some markets, and slowing growth in others: DisplaySearch found that notebooks were up only 2 percent year over year this past quarter and were down 2 percent compared to the first quarter of 2011. At the same time, the tablet market is up. Tablet PC shipments rose 70 percent in the second quarter of 2011 versus the first and 400 percent year over year. Even without the iPad, tablet shipments were up 25 percent year over year, with more than 5.6 million shipped during the latest quarter, according to DisplaySearch.

The numbers suggest that some, at least, are replacing traditional mobile PCs with tablets, and especially with iPads. And that’s backed up by various observations. I see more iPads at events and conferences than I ever have before; in many cases notebooks are carried but remain in the bag while the tablet stays out. Also, friends who don’t use a computer very often outside work have been very happy to replace their notebooks and desktops with a tablet full-time. Surveys seem to be showing that these examples aren’t isolated statistical oddities.

Of course, Apple stands to gain the most from the inclusion of tablets, since the iPad remains the clear category leader. But the iPad 2 is apparently really helping things along. Late in 2010, we noted that Apple had reached the No. 3 spot in the mobile PC market, with iPads included. According to DisplaySearch, it now has 21.1 percent of the mobile PC market by shipments, while HP is the next closest, with 15 percent. Dell, Acer and Lenovo make up the rest of the top 5, with 11.6, 10.9 and 7.5 percent, respectively.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• Report: The Future of Netbooks!
• A Media Tablet Forecast, 2011 – 2015

Without iPad sales included, Apple ranks last out of the top six global notebook manufacturers in terms of sales. But once you include the tablet, Apple jumps to the number one overall spot. Including tablets in global PC sales makes sense, because since the iPad’s introduction, sales share of traditional notebook devices among top companies like HP, Acer and Dell have either been in steady decline or more or less stagnant.

Even last December, it was apparent that the iPad was propelling Apple’s stake in the mobile PC market higher, and that doesn’t appear to be showing any signs of slowing. Competitors are still having trouble finding a foothold for their own tablets, although some predict that they’ll manage to do so in the next few years. But even if Apple doesn’t have as commanding a lead by then, it will still have secured its spot atop the mobile-computing heap, if trends continue along the path outlined by Whitmore.

A recent report from Jeffries analyst Peter Misek suggests that Apple might be moving toward a unified OS for its desktop/notebook and portable devices as early as next year. I’m still skeptical of this, since it involves a complete overhaul of the Mac line using ARM-based processor architecture, which would also necessitate huge shifts on the software side. But the iPad’s continued strong performance is a sign that Apple’s time and money may be better invested in efforts that benefit that platform most. After all, Apple has realized an additional $6 billion in revenue from the iPad alone, according to the company’s most recent earnings call. Predicting what comes next for such a game-changing product isn’t easy, but it definitely makes waiting and watching that much more exciting.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• Why iPad 2 Will Lead Consumers Into the Post-PC Era
• A Media Tablet Forecast, 2011 – 2015
• The rise of tablets in the enterprise

Samsung Galaxy Tab possibly printing

In conjunction with the iOS 4.2 beta, Apple has issued a press release touting “AirPrint.” The trendily named wireless printing feature for iOS will be included with iOS 4.2 in November.

“AirPrint is Apple’s powerful new printing architecture that matches the simplicity of iOS—no set up, no configuration, no printer drivers and no software to download,” gushed Apple VP Philip Schiller.

First demoed at the Apple Event in September, AirPrint will initially work with HP ePrint printers or shared printers on a PC or Mac. HP ePrint printers use unique e-mail addresses to receive documents from devices with e-mail capability, supporting a variety formats including Microsoft Office, PDFs, rich text, HTML, and others, though no mention is made of iWork.

Compatible shared printers include HP Photosmart, Officejet, and LaserJet models. Of course, only iOS devices capable of running iOS 4.2 will be AirPrint ready: iPad, iPhone 4, iPhone 3GS and iPod touch (second generation and later).

As nice as wireless printing from iOS devices will be, the unanswered question in the press release is why we are hearing about it again. The answer is the Samsung Galaxy Tab, the first real rival to the iPad launching this week in the U.S. that is wireless printing capable. This is something of a role reversal for Apple, fighting a real competitor with features on paper, paper that can’t yet be printed wirelessly.

The history of Apple’s flat panel monitor offerings is pretty dry, but as we’ll see, shows a pattern. Apple’s first LCD was a 15″ monitor that came in July 2000 and had a max resolution of 1024×768. It was a beautiful, very expensive display that weighed 12 pounds and had a viewing angle of 120 degrees. Soon, similar models in 17- and 22-inch configurations arrived. Finally, in 2002, we long-time Apple fans were caught drooling over the 23″ Apple Cinema HD display that pushed a 1920×1200 pixel resolution and was available directly from Apple for $3499.

Design-wise, updates have also been rare. Even after Apple went all aluminum with its PowerMac G5, and more recently, its Mac Pro, the plastic and translucent Cinema Displays remained unchanged. It wasn’t until June 2004 that Apple updated the design and went aluminum with displays bearing the same Cinema Display name in 20-, 23- and 30-inch configurations costing $1,299, $1,999 and $3,299 respectively. You were paying about the same as you did back in 2002, but for slightly larger monitors in sleeker packages with a viewing angle of 170 degrees and a much higher brightness (400 cd /m² versus 200 cd /m² in the old models). These monitors were pretty good, but still insanely expensive compared to comparable monitors from Viewsonic and Dell.

In October 2008 (nearly two years ago), Apple released the 24″ LED Cinema Display with a 178-degree viewing angle, IPS display and a 100:1 contrast ratio besting the previous model that only offered 700:1. The 20″ and 30″ Cinema Displays with old specs are still readily available, but only from eBay and a few resellers, so Apple is technically selling one monitor to replace a previous offering that included three: a 20″, 23″ and 30″ model. What gives?

Yesterday, that changed when Apple announced that a 27″ LED Cinema Display will go on sale in September for $999.

Where is the 30″ Model?

We don’t cover non-Apple news very much, but yesterday, HP released a new 30″ display that leverages IPS technology and has a 7-millisecond respond time, which is two times faster than Apple’s current 24″ display for $1399. The HP offering is only $400 more than Apple’s 27″ display that isn’t even shipping yet. What’s the holdup, Apple?

I covered the past Apple offerings because it’s obvious that Apple takes its sweet time with display releases, but there’s absolutely no need. I understand its withholding of cool features like FaceTime and bluetooth multitouch trackpads to fuel demand and excite Mac users every few weeks with a new toy, but display technologies universally offer exactly the same function.

Apple’s CRT, LCD and now LED monitors are exactly the same as monitors from every other manufacturer aside from the pretty aluminum-and-glass casing and nice additions like MagSafe ports or a built-in webcam, but Apple somehow charges a premium on identical technology (something we’re all used to as Mac users). Apple gains nothing by holding back on larger monitor releases. The fact that Apple released a 24″ model in October 2008 and in September 2010 is finally getting around to releasing a 27″ display gives me the impression that we’ll see a 30″ LED Cinema Display with a $1999 price tag sometime in July 2012. Of course, I’m doubtful of that, but the Adam of 2008 would have laughed when you told him he’d be waiting two years for a 27″ LED Cinema Display.

My point is that Apple’s withholding of larger monitors only makes power users like me buy a monitor from another manufacturer. My 30″ Dell 3008WFP that I bought two years ago has a higher contrast ratio, response time and brightness than Apple’s unreleased 27″ LED Cinema Display with a similar viewing angle. It also uses IPS technology which Apple acts as if it invented or as if using it is, somehow, cutting edge. The truth is, the 30″ Dell monitor released three years ago that costs only $1599 has the exact same specs as HP’s $1399 30″ that came out yesterday and will probably have the same specs as Apple’s $1999 30″ LED Cinema Display that may come out sometime in the next 24 months.

What Apple is doing is making pros buy monitors elsewhere. I wish the 30″ display sitting next to my iMac was an Apple-branded one and not a Dell, but I need the screen real estate and Apple has left me hanging.

So, Microsoft has unveiled a new tablet PC — a prototype made by HP, dubbed (not coincidentally) a Slate. Fake Steve Jobs suggests it ought to be called the “meh,” and he’s dead right, while the UK’s Telegraph said it could be a “major blow” to Apple, and they’re just dead wrong.

I’d like to laugh at this crazy last-minute pantomime display of “Me too!” (all dressed-up, it seems, as “Me first!”) but I can’t because the whole thing reeks of desperation.

In my personal blog yesterday I made some (not particularly original) predictions about Microsoft’s new tablet. I said it would fail, and that it would fail because it would run the full version of Windows 7 and require a stylus. My stylus prediction proved incorrect (so far; just you wait for the “Microsoft Slate PC Student and Business Edition” which will likely have a stylus and fold-out keyboard. That’s right, aka “a notebook”.)

Now, I know what the first comments down below will be; I’m a shameless Apple fanboy and this is pointless Microsoft bashing, yada yada… but while the former might contain an ounce of truth, this is by no means a pointless exercise. There’s good reason to study the Microsoft slate; while it doesn’t precisely tell us what to expect from Apple’s tablet, it does demonstrate what not to expect.

Chunky Fingers, Dinky Screens

A mixture of bad timing and poor UI design doomed Microsoft’s original Tablet PC vision. The hardware available in the early 2000’s was underpowered, overpriced, and remained that way through the end of the decade. (And I should know — I owned several tablet PC’s myself!)

Ironically, it was the one thing Microsoft could have fixed, the software, that proved to be the weakest link. Microsoft crowbarred-in a mostly-unmodified version of their desktop operating system, an OS designed with a keyboard and mouse in mind. Not a stylus. Certainly not a finger. If you ever tried holding a bulky tablet in one hand, brandishing a delicate stylus in the other, while doing anything other than sitting perfectly still and you’ll know why the whole thing was an exercise in error and frustration.

Apple avoided making that mistake. The iPhone’s software might be based on OS X, but you’d never know by looking at it. Its UI is perfectly suited for a chunky finger on a dinky little screen. I expect when Apple’s slate is revealed it will employ yet another version of OS X; something that lies between the iPhone’s UI and that of the full-fat, full-sugar, carb-rich desktop Mac OS X.

And I guarantee you will not see a single control element (button, tab, scrollbar and the like) migrate, intact and unchanged, from desktop OS X to tablet OS. Apple knows not to make that mistake. Microsoft does not; it’s loading Windows 7 — unmodified UI et al — onto its tablet. But this time there’s not even a stylus to help you. You gotta use your pinkies. The result — an awkward, practically unusable UI.

Ballmer very handily (pun intended) demonstrated this by fumbling about with the thing. His fingers weren’t particularly good at hitting the UI controls on the 7-inch screen that, due to its very form factor, rendered Windows controls as little more than diminutive dots.

We can only conclude Microsoft is making the same mistakes it made nearly 10 years ago with the first tablet PC’s. At least in 2002 it was doing something innovative.

Microsoft’s tablet announcement — just weeks before Apple’s — seems a desperate attempt to grab a little media attention and be the first to announce a tablet. Only, there’s nothing to gain in rushing to make this announcement, particularly not now, while it’s still only at prototype stage. The indomitable Andy Ihantko said it best on Twitter;

Title of Ballmer’s CES keynote: “Sorry, Guys…I Panicked And Told The NYT We’d Unveil A Tablet. You Have 72 Hrs To Build One.”

Worse: Microsoft has backed itself into a corner. This summer, in the wake of Apple’s iSlate (or whatever it’s called) if HP releases this tablet largely unchanged, it’ll get laughed out of the room. The alternative — massively changing it to more closely resemble Apple’s device — will be humiliating.

If we lived in Bizarro World, and Apple’s tablet turned-out to be just like Microsoft’s prototype, I’d be devastated. I’d question Apple’s creative strategy. I’d wonder if Jonny Ive was out of his mind. I’d definitely question Steve Jobs’ sanity. But you and I both know that when El Jobso takes the stage on the 27th and unveils his shiny new toy it will be breathtaking.

In the entire tech industry, the company with the requisite financial and engineering might to even come close to challenging Apple’s tablet is Microsoft. So, is this tired-old slate the best they can do? C’mon. For even the most ardent Microsoft fan, that’s simply embarrassing.

Who will buy this? The curious? Microsoft fanboys? Those who can’t afford an Apple slate? Or just masochists? Disagree vehemently with my fanboy ravings in the comments below.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• What Google’s Honeycomb Means for Apple and Microsoft
• A 2011 Infrastructure Forecast
• Big Data 2011 Preview

The new study, by Rescuecom, which is a U.S. firm specializing in computer repair, puts Apple at the top of the list when ranking computer makers. Previous studies by the repair franchise had seen Asus take the top spot, in keeping with the results of the SquareTrade study, but the most recent numbers (Q3 2009) show Apple with a commanding lead, according to Electronista.

Apple scored 374, which is more than double Asus’ 166. The PC maker scored third. Rescuecom’s rankings are based on the numbers of machines that it sees come in for repairs, as measured against the number of computers each company ships. The methodology for the study also includes factoring in things like system construction quality and manufacturer post-sale support, in order to bring some influence outside of Rescuecom’s operation to the table. Apple’s sales accounted for nine percent of the market in Q3, while only making up 2.4 percent of Rescuecom’s repair calls.

CEO David Millman suggests that Asus’ recent slip may be due to the growing presence of netbooks in its lineup of offerings. “Now that many of the netbooks by ASUS have been out for a while, there is obviously a higher need for service,” said Millman. It’s true that while Asus makes some of the most sturdy netbooks around, to achieve the incredibly low price points they offer to consumers, corners have to be cut in parts and manufacturing quality.

Lenovo also fared better in Rescuecom’s study, placing a strong second behind Apple with a score of 320. Toshiba and HP rounded out the top five with fourth and fifth place scores of 165 and 134, respectively. The common thread? All of these manufacturers offer at least one netbook-type computer.

There’s no way of saying for certain that low-cost netbooks are definitively affecting the reliability scores of computer makers, but it is beginning to look like Apple was wise to abstain from joining the fray, at least in this regard (though not in others). No doubt Apple’s introduction of unibody aluminum construction, which requires far fewer moving parts and better overall structural strength is also contributing to its increasing product dependability.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• Report: The Future of Netbooks!
• The State of the Smartbook
• Why iPad 2 Will Lead Consumers Into the Post-PC Era

Giampaulo: Technically Impaired

The star of the new ad, Giampaulo, claims to be “technically savvy,” and then spends the rest of ad proving he’s not. Apparently, his (and Microsoft’s) definition of “technically savvy” means buying a machine with Windows on it. By that definition, Lauren was “technically savvy” as well.

Near as I can tell, the primary reason Giampaulo got a machine one could argue was “better” than Lauren’s was simply because he had a higher budget, which was something he didn’t even control! And though the guts of the machine are better than Lauren’s, that huge 16 inch screen has less vertical resolution than a 13 inch MacBook. I mentioned in my write up of the Lauren ad that the way PC makers market screen sizes is a joke, and for Giampaulo to swallow it whole totally refutes any claim he had to being “technically savvy.”

The strangest thing about the ad is that Giampaulo’s machine choice (this HP HDX16) could be a nice machine — albeit with compromises — for $1,500 if he was as “picky” or “savvy” as he claimed.

Why didn’t Giampaulo simply go online and configure a machine to the maximum budget amount? Well, partially because he’s not “technically savvy,” but also maybe because Microsoft is getting a few bucks on the side for featuring HP and brick and mortar stores in their ads. This is comical because, for all the chest-beating Microsoft does about PC “choice”, these people just go into a local retailer and walk out with whatever they have on hand. That may have washed with Lauren, but it’s ridiculous when featuring someone who’s supposed to know the drill.

What I’d Get

As for me, I went online and configured an HDX16 as shown below:

• The 2.53 GHz P8700 processor is what shipped on the high-end 15 inch MacBook Pro until a couple months ago. While Apple’s moved on to something better, it’s still nothing to sneeze at.
• It sucks that DDR2 memory is used, but the machine’s designed to a price, and at least there’s 4GB.
• The graphics chip is what ships on the MacBook Pro.
• I’ve turned that 16-inch screen into something other than a portable IMAX. Ultra bright and 1920 x 1080 resolution.
• Got Bluetooth.
• Got a backlit keyboard.

Biggest change from Giampaulo’s is the vastly improved screen. To me, with a sprawling 16-inch display it’s a night and day difference. There’s a better processor (clock speed increase is small, but cache doubles from 3 to 6MB). There’s also a Blu-ray drive. Oh, and I love backlit keyboards, so I consider that a nice improvement as well.

As configured above, this is a very nice machine, though there are some weaknesses.

What I’d Miss

At only $1,500, some things had to get left behind:

• No software. I’ll need to spend money on productivity, AV, and other software.
• No extra or improved battery (see below for more detail on this).
• Not particularly impressive build quality.

It should be noted that PC makers in this economy are racing to the bottom in terms of pricing, since there’s nothing else to differentiate them. Notice that there’s a $200 instant rebate, the 4GB RAM upgrade was free, a 320GB drive upgrade was free, and so was the Blu-ray drive. In a better economy, and if not a “me too” product, this machine would be more expensive than it is right now.

There are other weaknesses. First, while the footprint is about what you’d expect for a 16-inch screen (between most 15 and 17 inch models), it’s really thick. From 1.3 to 1.7 inches. I think PC designers suck at handling a laptop’s heat, and they compensate by making the thing huge. I hate that. That also makes it a relatively heavy 7.37 pounds.

And the biggest weakness is battery life. Put simply, it has none. According to AppleInsider, “HP rates its built-in battery for less than 3 hours, but reviewers gave it less than two.” And that was at the “base” configuration. With the more powerful processor, ultra bright screen, and backlit keyboard, you’d be lucky to pull 1.5 hours on the thing. That’s worthless.

So why not get a better battery? Because the 12-cell battery is $50, and adds to the weight and size of the machine. Further, it would likely not even get three hours, so I’d have to be close to an outlet anyway. (PC makers seem to have problems with battery life; perhaps Vista’s a pig?) You might want to spend $50 on a battery and skip the backlit keyboard, but for me it’s not enough improvement, so I opted for the keyboard.

What It Boils Down To

Weaknesses aside, the machine I configured could be a very nice portable office. Yes, you’d need to be near a power outlet, but if you can live with that (and the size/weight), the machine has big screen resolution and brightness, very good power (both CPU and GPU), plenty of memory, and good hard drive storage.

Yes, I’ve set aside the Mac OS vs. Windows Vista argument so far. This is a Microsoft ad, so that question has already been addressed as far as the ad is concerned. Personally, there’s no way I’d trade my high-end unibody 13-inch MacBook for the HP I configured (let alone Giampaulo’s), and it was only $100 more. The HP has the larger screen and a bit more speed, but it’s huge, heavy, and plastic, with no software or battery life and, of course, runs Windows Vista.

I’m not sure why a “technically savvy” guy like Giampaulo didn’t understand what he could do with HP’s machine. In fact, the only thing he got right in the entire ad was to declare the MacBook “sexy.” I actually feel a little sorry for HP in the ad; it’s not presenting their product in the light I think it deserves. I chastised Lauren for getting a 17-inch screen and only having 1440 x 900 resolution, but she looks like a freakin’ genius compared to Giampaulo’s 16-inch model with 1366 x 768.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• What Google’s Honeycomb Means for Apple and Microsoft
• A 2011 Green IT Forecast
• A 2011 Infrastructure Forecast

Have you seen the ad yet? Lauren only has to find a laptop computer with a 17-inch screen for under a grand and she gets to keep it.

Lauren is a redhead. Long, thick, curly, lovely red hair. Did I mention redheads rule? Well, they do. Curse you, Microsoft, for using Lauren in this ad. Her engaging personality and infectious enthusiasm blinded me, and I eagerly sought the HP web site to pick up that great 17-inch laptop. After all, if it’s good enough for Lauren…

We don’t know exactly what laptop she got, but it’s an HP and has a 17-inch screen. It also rang up for $699, so that narrows the field quite a bit. On the HP notebook page we see the G70t series is listed as having 17-inch screens. Clicking for details, we see a “Quick Ship” model for $699, detailed here. I’m not saying this is the exact model Lauren got, but I think we can all agree it has to be darn close.

Let’s take a look:

• Screen resolution is 1440 x 900. This is only one step up from the MacBook Lauren admitted she wasn’t cool enough to own, yet comes at the cost of a huge and heavy notebook. I’m amazed at the marketing of screen sizes in the PC world, where the 13-, 14-, 15-, and even many 16-inch models come standard with WXGA resolution.
• Last year’s Intel 2.0 GHz processor on last year’s 800MHz front-end bus.
• 3GB of last year’s DDR2 memory.
• Claimed support of 4GB memory, but of course the 32-bit Vista OS can’t address that much, so it’s a bunch of baloney.
• Intel-integrated graphics, which will help suck the 3GB memory dry. Oh, and provide minimal performance.
• Don’t worry about the performance, though, because it’s not as if any worthwhile software comes with the thing. Certainly nothing like iLife.
• No Bluetooth, but then Lauren probably isn’t cool enough to own any BT devices, either.
• The battery? Much like screen sizes, this is another thing PC makers don’t talk a lot about. They keep it small so their already too-heavy notebooks don’t appear even more so. It’s a six-cell battery, which appears to be “up to” 3.5 hours battery life. That’s maybe 2.5 in the real world. Ouch!
• Oh well, as big and heavy as it is you won’t be taking it far from a power outlet anyway, so it doesn’t matter that you can’t.

So, is my point that the HP machine is crap? No. Seriously, it’s not. My point is it’s built to a price, and heavily compromised in the process. Nothing wrong with that; it is what it is.

But Microsoft’s (and HP’s) implication that PC vendors are charging cheap prices yet providing non-cheap components is a load of bull fecal matter. The vendors are — as they’ve always done — selling older CPUs and weak graphics, in a huge case, with little battery life, and festooned with stickers like it’s a trunk that just got back from an around-the-world cruise.

If that’s your thing, great! Add some software and knock yourself out. But don’t kid yourself into thinking you got anything more than you paid for, or found some sort of computer bargain, or know some secret the rest of us aren’t clued in on. You asked for little, and that’s exactly what you got. Of course, if low-ball is really what Lauren was after, she’d have looked into Linux, but this is a Microsoft ad so we’re only concerned with the price of hardware.

Next up, Lauren goes shopping for a car with eight speakers, power everything, and a navigation system. She gets a Kia after deciding she’s not cool enough for a BMW.

Clearly, Lauren doesn’t mind because she’s inexperienced and got the thing for free. Microsoft, please offer me that same deal. I’ll set even lower expectations than Lauren, get some $299 eWaste Linux PC, and save the remaining $700 for Apple’s new Mac mini touch tablet whatever machine due to be released any day now.

Meanwhile, I’m glad Microsoft doesn’t take the Lauren saga to its conclusion. She’ll wise up eventually, and I can honestly say it’d break my heart to see her pulling all that hair out.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• What Google’s Honeycomb Means for Apple and Microsoft
• A 2011 Green IT Forecast
• A 2011 Infrastructure Forecast

Before you make the jump into consolidation of those separate devices with a new AIO printer, you might want to define some simple criteria. What is your budget? What are your needs? Do you know? Well, hopefully this article will set you down the right path. For one, let’s start with a modest budget of $300-400. Next, let’s define some functional criteria.

Recommended Features

• Excellent print quality (documents are readable) even with prints from draft mode
• Network capable (Ethernet), so it can support printing and scanning from the device to a computer and vice-versa
• Automatically copy, print and scan on both sides of the paper (duplexer)
• Automatic Document Feeder (ADF) for multiple page copies/scans
• Separate trays for printing paper vs. photos/envelopes
• Stores at least 150 sheets of paper
• Fax support with memory and auto-redial/fax
• 8.5×14 paper support for printing and scanning
• Color screen for easier readability of device functions
• Excellent customer/technical support
• Great software support for drivers and provided applications
• Six-ink system for more flexibility
• Low total cost of ownership (TCO)

Optional (Bonus) Features

• Wireless network capable
• Printing directly to CDs/DVDs
• Memory card access/support (over the network)
• Photo printing: 4×6, 5×7, 8×10 or larger
• Quiet or moderate noise production

Performance

Printer speed is always subjective, as most manufacturers provide the best specs based upon the lowest quality settings. For example, you will see that at an AIO prints 32 pages per minute in black and white. This seems impressive, yes? Well, this speed example is in draft mode, not full quality.

Until there are metrics that define the entire spectrum of how each unit performs when printing in draft vs. best and color vs. black & white, it just doesn’t make sense to use speed as a realistic criteria.

What are the choices?

Using the above requirements, it probably makes sense to visit your local office supply/big box store and try some of the printers in person. I took the liberty of doing this for you and here are some of the choices available in the specified price range (please note, the prices mentioned are current retail at publishing):

• Canon Pixma MX850 – $199, 5-ink, comes close to meeting the criteria except in build quality as the ADF seems flimsy
• Epson Artisan 800 – $299, New model on the market, ADF does not support duplex copy/scan, print duplexer is a separate purchase, comes with a 2-year warranty
• HP Photosmart C7280 – $269.99 (usually $299.99, although HP has instant rebates now), ADF does not support duplex copy/scan, all other above required features met
• Lexmark X9575 Professional – $249.99, New model to the market, 4-ink, duplex copying and printing (not clear about duplex scanning – although it can duplex copy), comes with 5-year warranty
• Brother MFC-6490CW – $299.99, New model to the market, 4-ink, no duplex support

If you want to stretch your budget by a little:

• Canon Pixma MX7600 – $399, excellent build quality, all criteria met
• HP OfficeJet Pro L7880 – $349.99 (usually $499.99, although HP has instant rebates now), very large dimensions, all recommended criteria met

Getting to one printer from seven

With seven (including the two that stretch the budget) different printer models to choose from, here are some considerations to minimize that choice to one or two.

Let’s take the Brother MFC-6490CW, Canon Pixma MX850 and Lexmark X9575 Professional off the list because they are not traditional six-ink printers. The Lexmark has the option to go six-ink, although there is additional cost.

Printer count: 4

Let’s remove the HP Photosmart C7280 because it neither supports duplex copy or scan. Anecdotally, I really like the form-factor and build quality of the Photosmart. It is a very nice printer with a pretty comprehensive feature set. If duplex is not important, then this model is an excellent choice.

Printer count: 3

The HP OfficeJet Pro L7880 was removed because of its sheer size (it has the largest dimensions at 20.91″ x 19.09″ x 17.48″) and the fact that it is outside the budget of $300. However, with an extended budget, this is a very nice printer as it meets every requirement, including printing 8×10 photos.

Printer count: 2

Recommendations

$300 range – Epson Artisan 800 (full review) as it meets most of the recommended and most optional requirements. It’s only missing feature is the ability to duplex copy and scan.

$400 range – Canon Pixma MX7600 (full review) does meet every recommended and most optional requirements as well. The added bonus is that it, like the HP OfficeJet Pri L7880, has the ability to duplex copy and scan.

Additional Resources

I recommend that you read as many professional and blogger reviews of the products to see if anyone has found any particular issues with the printer you want. Other than some hardware failures, most of the AIOs were reviewed well, so I don’t think you can make a bad choice here. Good luck in your decision making process and toward improving and consolidating your SoHo environment.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• Report: 3-D Computing From Digital Cinema to GPUs
• Why iPad 2 Will Lead Consumers Into the Post-PC Era
• What Google’s Honeycomb Means for Apple and Microsoft

Next, it has an amazing 7″ touch screen for easy operation of the AIO. This is probably the most impressive feature of the printer and definitely adds to the sexiness factor. Another bonus is that the printer comes with an extra black cartridge. This was a pleasant surprise during the out-of-box-experience.

The Automatic Document Feeder (ADF) holds up to 30 pages, although it does not support duplex copying or scanning. If you are not copying or scanning two-sided documents, then this should not be an issue for you. For most folks, that will probably be the case.

In order to utilize two-sided printing, you must purchase the duplexer accessory, which is an additional $30. Further, this duplexer is not available at any online or retail establishments, it is only at the online Epson store. It seems odd that Epson requires you to purchase a peripheral for a peripheral.

The Artisan 800 build quality is good. The overall unit feels solid, although the ADF and print trays all feel a little flimsy. One of the special features of the Artisan 800 is that it can print directly to printable CD/DVDs. The printer even comes with a specialized tray for this feature.

In order to print documents, the primary print tray must always be extended. Why is this item noteworthy? As a network printer, it could easily live in an unreachable place. Users of the printer might not know if the print tray is extended and thus any printing they perform could cause a paper jam (if the tray is not extended).

Faxing with the Epson is relatively straightforward. Insert your document into the ADF, utilize the touch screen to specify the destination and send it. The Artisan 800 can store up to 60 speed dials and has a 180 page memory for previously receive faxes, making it easy to reprint them.

One annoying problem with the Artisan 800 is that you can only network scan via the Mac, and not via the printer itself. Essentially, network scans are a two step process:

1. Go to the printer and add documents you want to scan to the ADF.
2. Go to the computer and run the software for scanning.

This seems counter-intuitive. If you want to scan something and send it to your Mac, you should be able to do it from the printer. Note, this functionality does work if you connect the Artisan 800 directly to your Mac via USB.

The Artisan 800 print quality for standard text documents is good. I noticed some slight bleeding with smaller font sizes (6-8pt), although point sizes above were laser quality. I did not print photos, although the demos I have seen look quite good.

One other item that merits attention is that the Artisan 800 is not a quiet printer. It makes quite a thunk when it warms up. Something else to consider in your purchase decision.

The Epson software is relatively solid and makes setting up the printer easy, even over the network. Epson includes software for OCR scanning as well printing to CDs. This is a nice touch.

Finally, I ran into some print setting issues once I installed the duplexer, which were thankfully resolved once I contacted customer support. Speaking of support, Epson’s support is good in that they generally reply within 24-36 hours with respectable answers.

The Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) of this printer includes the following:

Capital costs

• Epson Artisan 800: $299 (MSRP)
• Duplexer Accessory: $30 (Optional)

Annuities

• Replacement Inks: $102.54 (6 x $17.09 high-capacity) or $69.29 (5 x 10.44 low capacity + 1 high capacity black)

The high capacity inks can print approximately 855 pages before replacement, while the standard capacity can print about 500 pages. If you print a ream a month, expect that you will be spending about $70 (average) with low capacity inks. If you use high-capacity inks, you will spend about $51 every month (average). Granted, this is just printing/copying regular paper. Your mileage may vary if you print photos and other types of content. For more information, Epson has documentation about their Ink Cartridge Yields.

Please note that as with most Epson printers, if you run out of any color ink cartridge, you cannot opt to print in black & white. You must replace that empty cartridge and then you can print in black & white (or color again if you so choose). Further, it appears you can only currently purchase the ink cartridges from either Epson directly or Amazon.

Conclusion

If you are in the market for a new All-in-one printer, then you should consider this new contender from Epson. The Artisan 800 is a very solid device with a rich feature set. Lastly, the unit does have some small nits, and please be mindful of the build quality.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• Report: 3-D Computing From Digital Cinema to GPUs
• Why iPad 2 Will Lead Consumers Into the Post-PC Era
• What Google’s Honeycomb Means for Apple and Microsoft

Full disclosure: I have owned two other Canon printers (a MultiPASS MP390 and a Pixma MP970) and they both have been exceptional in terms of print quality as well as being made like tanks.

One of the novel features of this device is the way in which it puts the ink to the paper. Initially, the Pixma 7600 lays down a layer of clear ink and then begins to add the respective colors. Honestly, this seemed like a marketing gimmick, until I viewed the print quality.

To be clear, the Pixma MX7600 print quality for documents is fantastic. Color pops on the page and even small point sizes (6-8pt) are readable. Further, when using relatively inexpensive paper, the ink does not bleed. I have not printed any photos, although the demos from within the store I have seen are exceptional. As an additional bonus, the Canon prints in near silence and includes a quiet-mode setting.

The Pixma MX7600 supports duplexing for copying, scanning and printing. It supports networking over Ethernet, although it is not wireless capable. From the unit, you can scan items to any Mac on the network.

One annoyance with this unit is that setting it up over the network is a little clumsy. First, you must connect the printer to the Mac via USB while at the same time, connect it to the router over Ethernet. This happens because Canon implemented their own network discovery software rather than using Bonjour from Apple.

On the positive side, each time you print, the printer tray door opens automatically, avoiding any potential paper jams. It’s nice to see Canon consider small touches like this for an AIO printer because in a network environment, it is possible that users will be printing where they cannot directly access and/or see the printer and ensure that the print tray is extended.

Another small issue with the printer is that you cannot mount media cards (compact flash, etc.) over the network. This feature is only available via USB. If this is an important feature for your SoHo, consider it in your evaluation.

Faxing with the Canon is relatively straightforward. Insert your document into the ADF, utilize the touch screen to specify the destination and send it. The Pixma MX7600 can store up to 100 speed dials and has a 250 page memory for previously receive faxes, making it easy to reprint them.

As an added bonus, this printer is built like a tank, which is pretty exceptional seeing how it is made of recycled plastics. Nothing feels flimsy or under-developed.

If I were to make any recommendations for the next generation of this printer, I would suggest that Canon increase the size of the small 1.8″ color screen for additional readability. Epson sets a new standard here with their 7″ touch screen display. Canon could consider this as well, although call me old school, but I like the mixture of simple screen and hard buttons with the Pixma MX7600.

Canon’s support team is excellent. The standard business reply time via email is 24 hours. I received a reply within two hours of problem submission. Further, the answer was clear and solved my problem immediately (setting up the printer over IPv6).

The Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) of this printer includes the following:

Capital costs

• Canon Pixma MX7600: $399 (MSRP)

• Replacement Inks: $92.94 (5 x 14.99 low capacity + 1 Clear Ink @ 17.99)

The inks can print approximately 800 pages (averaged across all colors) before replacement. If you print a ream a month, expect that you will be spending about $60 (average). Granted, this is just printing/copying regular paper. Your mileage may vary if you print photos and other types of content. For more information, Canon has this information at their support site.

Please note, it appears you can only currently purchase the ink cartridges from either Canon directly or at Amazon.

Conclusion

If you are in the market for a new all-in-one printer, and have a more sizable budget, then you should consider this device from Canon. The Pixma MX7600 is a very solid device with a rich feature set.

Personal Sidebar

After five weeks of research and testing printers, there was much learned. For one, there are many great products out there for SoHo users to choose from when selecting an AIO printer. Second, be clear on your personal/business needs for selecting a printer. Lastly, make sure that you understand the costs of what you are purchasing, as buying a printer is not a one-time action.

For me, the Canon Pixma 7600 met my requirements and is becoming the SoHo daily workhorse in our household. Its print quality, build quality, relatively manageable TCO and ability to duplex copy/scan/print made it the clear winner.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• Report: 3-D Computing From Digital Cinema to GPUs
• Why iPad 2 Will Lead Consumers Into the Post-PC Era
• What Google’s Honeycomb Means for Apple and Microsoft

Enter ‘Live Disc’, Rogue Amoeba’s cool new innovation that [sort of] eliminates the possibility of delivering discs with out-of-date code. They give you the full story on their blog, but here’s the gist of it:

Live Disc presents a window much like a customized Finder window, with application icons that you can drag for copying or double-click for launching. The magic is, if a newer copy exists on our web server, it will copy or launch that version instead, seamlessly.

This a very cool idea – one I’d love to hear your take on if you pick one up at The Big Show in a couple weeks. The really neat part is that this solution was one that was conceived just to show off their real products! It’s not far-fetched that they could package this into an application of it’s own, and all as a byproduct of their main focus. Great work guys! It’s stuff like this that makes me excited to play on a Mac everyday.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• Why iPad 2 Will Lead Consumers Into the Post-PC Era
• What Google’s Honeycomb Means for Apple and Microsoft
• A 2011 Green IT Forecast