Ok, so I really didn’t have that conversation with my iPad 3. At least not out loud! But it is true: The new iPad mini is replacing my iPad 3; lack of Retina display, be damned! Before I share more thoughts on the two tablets and what led me to the decision, let me bring back some salient points I made nearly two years ago on Apple missing out on the small tablet market. That post, along with the great reader commentary, was read by Apple executives who then decided to enter the small tablet market.

What’s the big deal about small tablets?

Here’s my summary from back then when describing the experience with my 7-inch Galaxy Tab:

“I’m not suggesting everyone dump their iPads; I’m simply explaining my own decision making process to help you make your own. And aside from our own Darrell Etherington at the GigaOM Apple channel who tried, and then returned a Tab, I’ve heard from at least a dozen Tab owners who are also finding less use for the iPad (and other devices) based on the 7-inch form factor. Darrell’s experience with the Tab ironically made him realize that he wants a 7-inch iPad. I’m inclined to agree and would consider dumping my Tab if Apple were to sell such a device. It would be the best of both worlds, regardless of Steve Jobs’s insinuation that it will never happen.

Darrell’s sentiment highlights a key point I’m trying to make here: We often look at the features of a device, but I contend that form is just as much a feature as the CPU clock cycle or the amount of memory in a mobile device. Of course, you never know that until you try a new form factor to see how it fits in your lifestyle. I’m glad I did that with the Tab.”

Perhaps the most important point here is that without the experience of using a small slate, it’s easy to miss its biggest benefit: portability.

But it doesn’t have a Retina Display!

Dooming the device without experience is of using it has already been seen: iPad mini naysayers were decrying the device for its 1024 x 768 display before the device even shipped. I can’t argue with them that the Retina display on the recent iPads are outstanding. But the screen on the iPad mini isn’t as bad as the ones found on the first two iPads.

“Wait, aren’t those all 1024 x 768 resolution? How can the iPad mini screen be better than the first two iPads?” I’m glad you asked, and it’s a pretty simple answer really. Because the same 786,432 pixels of a display with this resolution are crammed into a smaller screen, the pixel density is greater. That means, all things being equal, things on the screen will look clearer. Not by much, but enough to see a difference. So no, the iPad mini display can’t compete with the screen on the newest iPads, but it’s better than the iPads from two or three years ago.

Just as I said when I dumped the first iPad in favor of a 7-inch tablet, I don’t expect everyone to follow suit. After all, thanks to a myriad of applications, the iPad is used differently by everyone. For example, I actually don’t create much content on an iPad, outside of emails and social network updates, that is. If I actually used my iPad to write my daily blog posts, I might feel differently as I find that activity better on a screen larger than 7 or 7.9 inches.

Instead, I do far more content consumption: ebook reading; web browsing; watching TED videos, television episodes and movies; using various apps and games. All of these activities fit nicely on the iPad mini and I’m already doing them in more places: my “large” iPads always tended to stay at home, but the iPad mini can easily go anywhere. And as I noted in early 2011, the best tablet is the one you have with you.

A full iPad experience in a smaller package is a huge selling point

As far as the iPad mini’s usage, performance and feature set, I feel like I’m getting the full iPad experience in a package more suited to my particular needs. Based on a visit to the local Apple Store in King of Prussia, Penn. over the weekend, I suspect many others are starting to see the light. I watched person after person enter the store and walk up to the iPad mini display units with a quizzical look on their face, as if to say, “What’s the point of this smaller iPad?”

More often than not, those looks melted away after a few minutes and it was as if I could actually see the light bulbs going off over people’s heads. Between the portability, the lower price and the full iPad experience, I suspect Apple will sell more iPad mini tablets this holiday season than any other iPad model.

So, goodbye, iPad 3. You were great; whenever I had you around, that is. The problem is a slimmer, lighter model provides the same utility in more places for me; even with that lowly 1024 x 768 display.

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

• Controversy, courtrooms and the cloud in Q1
• A look back at mobile in Q1
• Tablet market to hit over 377 million units by 2016

• The Atlantic‘s James Fallows got insider access to a Foxconn facility in Shenzhen, China this week. He posts pictures inside the facilities and some observations about what life is like for the people who build our iPhones, iPads and laptops.
• After losing an appeal, Apple was ordered again to post a public apology to Samsung on its website and in print publications in the U.K. in 14-point type for saying the company’s Galaxy Tab was a rip-off of the iPad. (via Fortune)
• Why would Apple want to buy a (mostly) failed company like Color, as has been reported? AllThingsD says Apple actually acquired just a few Color employees, but not its intellectual property, technology or debt. Those who were brought over to Cupertino will be working on cloud technology.
• Apple’s former head of retail operations said there would be 25 Apple Stores in China by the end of 2012. That’s not going to happen. However, Apple just announced two more stores to open in the country this year, bringing to the total to eight, according to Bloomberg Businessweek.
• Have you seen a flickering on your iPhone 5′s virtual keyboard? AppleInsider tracks the growing number of complaints from users on Apple’s own support forums.

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

• Defining the mobile wallet: what it is, why it matters
• Mobile Q2: Smartphone growth surges; iPad’s rule continues
• Why iPad 2 Will Lead Consumers Into the Post-PC Era

For example, in December 2010, the first quarter Samsung’s tablet launched, it announced it had sold 1 million units worldwide. According to court documents AllThingsD and CNET published yesterday, Samsung sold 262,000 in the U.S. Back in December 2010, it was reported that 100,000 Tabs were sold in Samsung’s home market in South Korea. But even at the time we wondered where the rest of the 900,000 sales were going. If 262,000 were in the U.S., that leaves more than 600,000 sales unaccounted for. And if they weren’t selling in the U.S., the world’s largest tablet market, well, where did they go?

The discrepancy in numbers occurs again in the second quarter of 2012. A research report from IDC last week showed Samsung sold 2.3 million Galaxy Tabs worldwide. The court documents show that in the U.S., between April and June, Samsung sold 37,000 units. (Yes, there was an injunction issued on sales of the Tab 10.1, but it wasn’t until the very end of the quarter.)

Is it possible that a tablet that’s not selling well in the U.S. is thriving and selling millions outside the country? Sure. But the more likely explanation boils down to the problem with reporting numbers of products shipped versus sold. It comes up over and over again. Does selling to a retailer count as “sold” if the product sits on a shelf in a store instead of in the hands of a customer?

This same evidence also sheds light on Apple’s internal sales numbers. They show Apple has sold 166 million iOS devices in its home country since 2007 (iPhone, iPad and iPod touch). Apple’s reported around 400 million total iOS sales worldwide. That means 334 million, or about 58 percent were sold somewhere outside the U.S. As Apple has reported, in 2012, its international business accounts for somewhere between 58 percent and 64 percent of its sales — so it adds up.

Even though the numbers don’t reveal anything embarrassing for Apple, the entire exercise of this trial has forced open Apple’s very secret world of product design and marketing. From pre-production prototypes of the iPad, to internal company emails about plans for a smaller iPad, and clues into the company’s culture, Apple has made a huge tradeoff in being a part of this litigation.

Samsung has also had embarrassing internal documents and conversations revealed during the trial. But while Apple shouts about its sales numbers every quarter, Samsung very purposely does not talk about devices sales figures at all anymore. The company only reveals percentages of device sales improvement. So, these latest numbers revealing Samsung’s uninspiring tablet sales in the U.S. is probably just as painful for the company as Apple’s prototype photos being pasted all over the web.

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

• What the Google-Motorola deal means for Android, Microsoft and the mobile industry
• Mobile Q2: Smartphone growth surges; iPad’s rule continues
• Research In Motion: future scenarios for its fate

I wanted to say thanks for making my birthday weekend so special with news from your trial with Samsung. I was celebrating the fact that I made it through another year and was offline when the news hit. Eddy — can I call you Eddy? – you read one of my more controversial posts from Jan. 2011 and shared it with Tim, Scott and Phil. Eddy, I echo your comments about most activities working quite well on a 7-inch tablet and read that you thought browsing wasn’t so great. I find it pretty decent, but you say “tomato,” I say “tomahto,” and it’s all good.

By the way, that web browser from early 2011 has already been replaced by a much better version of Chrome. I recommend giving it a try as I think it’s at least as good, if not better than Apple’s own Safari for iOS. Oh, and don’t try the watered-down version on an iOS device. We all know third-party browsers still use iOS WebKit and can’t use their own JavaScript engine; that’s Apple’s prerogative and I’m fine with that, although I’d love to see you reconsider it.

Anyway, since we’re now reading each other, I thought to continue the conversation. (OK, we’re not really on speaking terms or anything, but my kids thought it was super cool that you read, and then suggested others read, their dad’s articles on mobile technology. I know we’ll never meet, but for my kids’ sake, can you play along for me? Think of the kids, Eddy!) It turns out I’ve shared some other articles with more reasons that can help if you’re serious about the whole smaller iPad project. Assuming there’s still time for some input, that is.

More validation and reasons

So two months before I even wrote the “Why I Dumped the iPad (Hint: Size Matters)” article I noticed that Samsung had sold 600,000 Galaxy Tabs one month after the product launched. That’s a pittance compared to the number of iPads you guys sell, but I think it starts to validate that there was, or is, a market for smaller slates. Remember, that first Galaxy Tab came with a slightly modified phone interface; not a true tablet operating system. Let’s face it: You Apple folks have a smart-looking interface for tablets that is intuitive to use. If Samsung moved 600,000 tablets back then with a phone UI — in a market segment that really didn’t exist — just think what you could do with iOS 6 on a small slate now.

A month later, I suggested four compelling reasons to get in this game. It’s not that you really need to — you’ve got enough cash to help bail the U.S. out of this slow economy with your own stimulus package — but as the top mobile company in the world, do you want to cede a segment to a company that’s both a key hardware business parter and you main opposition in the courts? Wow, that’s sounds weird when I read it out loud. Can’t you and Samsung just arm wrestle for settlement terms or something? Wait, I digress…

Yes I need to work out more to carry bigger tablets

Those four reasons I gave you in Dec. 2010, still apply and the first one you’ve already noted yourself: Smaller tablets are more portable. And listen, I might have dumped the original iPad, but I did buy the iPad 2 and the new iPad. (So we’re still pseudo-BFFs, right?) They’re both awesome tablets, but only when I have them with me. And at 125 pounds, my skinny arms aren’t made to carry the iPad or around, nor consume content for any length of time while holding it. That’s probably on me, and I promise to do more push-ups. Until I get pumped up though, I’m turning to a smaller slate when I walk out my door.

The iPod touch has done what it needed; it’s time to let go

About those other reasons; some of those are now evident too. I suggested that credible 7-inch tablets were launching and it’s fair to say that’s more true today; think of that Kindle Fire, Nook Tablet or the newer Galaxy Tab devices, for example. You probably won’t like my third reason — I know others didn’t — which is an observation that the iPod touch will have limited appeal in the future. Of course, I wrote that in the past, so the future is now. Yup, that hurts my head too when I think about it. Sorry. Your iPod sales are down and have been trending that way for a while. It’s a neat device, but the iPhone is more capable. And I know I don’t need to remind you, but the average selling price of that iPhone is more than double that of an iPod touch.

Maybe it’s time to let the iPod touch wither on the vine; keep making it, but don’t improve it much more — kinda like what you did last year with it, which was really nothing. That opens up the pricing spot for a spiffy small iPad to start at $249 for the lowest storage capacity and $449 for the highest. Hey, that’s $50 less than a full-sized iPad, giving you that “If you only spend a little more…..” selling angle if you want to push it.

Anyway, thanks again for validating what I’ve thought prior. Even though we’re only “friends” in my mind, I’ll keep sharing my mobile experiences with smaller tablets with you and every once in a while, maybe you could just leave me a comment on the posts. You know, keep me in line and continue the conversation. It’s not that I think you guys need my input or validation for your products — you’re done just fine without me — but it’ll keep my kids happy. Thanks!

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

• Mobile Q2: Smartphone growth surges; iPad’s rule continues
• Analyzing the wearable computing market
• Tablet market to hit over 377 million units by 2016

High Court judge Colin Birss was giving his verdict in one of the many, many court cases rattling on between Samsung and Apple. As with the recent U.S. ruling that saw the Galaxy Tab banned there, and a similar case in Germany half a year ago, this one was to do with design patents.

Samsung had pre-emptively asked the High Court to rule that its Galaxy Tabs (the 7.7″, 8.9″ and 10.1″ models) didn’t look too much like the iPad, and Apple counterclaimed to say there was infringement going on.

Here’s what Birss had to say about Samsung’s tablets:

From the front they belong to the family which includes the Apple design; but the Samsung products are very thin, almost insubstantial members of that family with unusual details on the back. They do not have the same understated and extreme simplicity which is possessed by the Apple design. They are not as cool. The overall impression produced is different. Conclusion: the Samsung tablets do not infringe Apple’s registered design No. 000181607-0001.”

Good to have that settled then, right? Well no.

You and I both know that this idiotic case will keep rearing its swivel-eyed head again and again, with only the country and the name of the judge changing each time.

Read that ruling. Look through it in all the detail with which it was written. Marvel at the fact that the first example of prior tablet-like design that Samsung submitted to the court was, in all seriousness, the Etch-A-Sketch. Choke at the time being wasted by legal systems around the world, having to come up with analysis like this:

“Most of the corners and edges of the Apple design are rounded but this edge is relatively sharp. There was a suggestion that this crisp edge plays a part in the enhancement of the appearance of thinness. I do not accept that. The impression of thinness is enhanced by the curve at the back, not by the crisp edge at the front.”

Seriously? This patent war is crazy enough when it’s dealing with functionality (should a concept such as unified search be patentable, as U.S. judge Lucy Koh believes?) but it goes right into jaw-on-the-floor territory when it comes to the design stuff. Lest we forget, this is what Apple’s lawyers suggested to a U.S. court last year, regarding how its competitors could avoid infringing on the iPad design:

“Overall shapes that are not rectangular with four flat sides or that do not have four rounded corners; front surfaces that are not completely flat or clear and that have substantial adornment; thick frames rather than a thin rim around the front surface; and profiles that are not thin […] or that have a cluttered appearance.”

We’re looking at a schoolyard spat dressed up in adult legalisms. Apple, Samsung, lawyers… please stop wasting everyone’s time with this pettiness.

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

• Mobile Q2: Smartphone growth surges; iPad’s rule continues
• Tablet market to hit over 377 million units by 2016
• Tablets wars: Apple is from Venus, Amazon is from Mars

What is this iPad impostor and how did Apple ban it?

In 2011, Korean electronics maker Samsung began selling a device called the Galaxy 10.1, which Apple said infringed its patents. Since a patent can allow an owner to exclude others from the market, Apple sought a ban in the form of a preliminary injunction.

What do Apple’s patents cover?

Apple’s lawsuits threw everything but the kitchen sink at Samsung, but the iPad maker ultimately prevailed on a special type of a patent called a “design patent” that covers the look and feel of an invention (you can learn about Apple’s design patents here). Apple is also hitting the Samsung Galaxy with a separate suit based on conventional “utility patents,” but for now the design patents have done the trick.

I thought the judge said Apple’s design patent was invalid?

She did. In a widely reported episode last fall, U.S. District Judge Lucy Koh waved both tablets in the air and said she couldn’t tell the difference — meaning that Samsung had infringed the design patent. But she also said it didn’t matter because Apple’s patent was likely to be found invalid on the grounds that it was an obvious design based on earlier tablets. This is why she refused in December to grant Apple an injunction. You can decide for yourself whether the iPad design was obvious based on the earlier tablets:

Apple appealed Koh’s conclusion that the iPad design was obvious. The appeals court sided with Apple, suggested the design was not obvious and sent the case back to Koh to decide if an injunction should be granted. This week she agreed to grant a temporary one.

So what happens now?

Koh’s temporary injunction goes into effect as soon as Apple can scrape together a $2.6 million bond. Once it does (we imagine Apple can find the money), Samsung has to pull its tablets off of store shelves.

Why does Apple have to post a bond?

Apple has to post the bond because the injunction is just preliminary — something to protect it until the case goes to a full trial and a court can decide whether or not to impose a permanent injunction. But in reality, a court only grants a preliminary injunction if a party is likely to win in the long run. And, more importantly, by the time the case gets to trial, both tablets in question will be obsolete.

Can Samsung appeal the preliminary injunction?

Yes, and it already has.  Samsung has almost no chance of winning, however, because appeals courts are very reluctant to disturb a temporary order. The company could also file for an emergency stay but that would likely fail as well.

So is this a crushing blow to Samsung’s tablet ambitions?

Here’s the catch. The temporary injunction only applies to Samsung’s 10.1 tablet which, according to my mobile expert colleagues, is already out of date and was vanishing from Best Buy even before the injunction. Meanwhile, Samsung is selling a new model, the Galaxy Tab 2, of its tablet for a lower price on Amazon (meaning the offending 10.1 tablet is basically irrelevant). And, according to our Kevin Tofel:  ”GT 2 has a visual difference: speakers around the bezel, making it look less like the iPad.”

Bottom line is that Apple won the preliminary injunction but it won’t really matter in the marketplace.

So did Apple just spend tens of millions in legal fees for nothing?

Yes and no. On the legal front, it has nothing to show but a symbolic victory — the injunction on the out-of-date Galaxy 10.1 won’t really hurt Samsung, which is free to sell its later models.

On the other hand, Apple has won a big PR victory. It can use Judge Koh’s decision to burnish its reputation as an innovator and also serve notice (yet again) to Samsung and other would-be competitors to stay away from the iPad design.

I just can’t get enough of this patent stuff. Where can I learn more?

Given the money at stake in the patent fights, some companies have stooped to paying ethically challenged bloggers who write propagandized news stories without revealing who is paying them to do so. For honest coverage, you can rely on wire services like Reuters and Bloomberg whose reporters are not paid by the companies they cover. For more in-depth coverage about patent law in general, you can read leading blogs like Patently-O or the IPKat.

(Image by Maxx-Studio via Shutterstock)

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

• Mobile Q2: Smartphone growth surges; iPad’s rule continues
• Tablet market to hit over 377 million units by 2016
• What the Google-Motorola deal means for Android, Microsoft and the mobile industry

Google introduced Android 4.0 in October, choosing the Galaxy Nexus smartphone to demonstrate the improved user experience and new feature set. Relatively few devices have seen the software upgrade since then, however, and new devices have only recently begun to ship with the software in the past few months. The eight models of the Galaxy Tab slated for the update include both the Wi-Fi and 3G versions of the Galaxy Tab 7.0 Plus, Tab 7.7, Tab 8.9 and Tab 10.1.

After this year’s Consumer Electronics Show in January, I imported the Galaxy Tab 7.7 with Wi-Fi and as much as the hardware impresses, the software has let me down a little. The tablet launched with Android 3.2, which I find inferior to Android 4.0 on my Galaxy Nexus and other new phones and tablets. I’m looking forward to seeing the improvements after the software upgrade, which make Android easier to navigate and use.

If history is a good predictor, all of the upgraded tablets will still rely on Samsung’s TouchWiz user interface; other upgraded devices from Samsung have hidden Android 4.0 with TouchWiz. That’s to be expected, but I’m wondering what, if any, of Samsung’s new features found on the Galaxy S III might be included as well. The company’s newest smartphone is packed with software and sharing features that could greatly improve the Galaxy Tab experience.

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

• Is Android broken and if so, will Google fix it?
• Mobile Q2: Smartphone growth surges; iPad’s rule continues
• Tablet market to hit over 377 million units by 2016

The companies are tangled in complicated legal proceedings over whether the Galaxy infringes design patents related to Apple’s iPad. Koh’s new ruling, first reported by Bloomberg, said that Apple’s latest request for a ban was premature because an appeals court had not formally issued a mandate for her to reconsider.

This week’s ruling grows out of a small victory for Apple from May 14 in which the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ruled that Koh’s analysis of one of the design patents was flawed. In particular, it questioned Koh’s conclusion that the iPad design was obvious in light of a tablet prototype from 1994. You can decide for yourself (the design described in the Apple patent is shown on the left):

The appeals court also ruled that Koh should have considered the public interest and “the balance of hardships” before refusing Apple’s request for a preliminary injunction. It sent the case back to Koh for her to try again. In her ruling this week, however, she ruled that Apple had come back too soon. This will likely kick her ruling on the substance of the matter by a matter of months.

What it means in the bigger picture

The biggest upshot of Koh’s ruling is that it buys more time for Samsung to familiarize consumers with its product in the marketplace and to prepare a work-around if Koh should decide to grant a temporary injunction over the design.

There is, of course, no guarantee that Koh will grant the temporary injunction. While the appeals court has asked her to reconsider one element of her ruling, she still has room to deny Apple on other grounds.

If Apple fails to get a temporary injunction, it can still push on and seek a permanent one. The reality, however, is that the tablet market will already have advanced several cycles by that time so that even if Apple can get a permanent ban, the order may not mean anything by that point.

But even if Apple’s tablet lawsuit fails, it may achieve a larger strategic goal of persuading Samsung and other would-be iPad competitors to take more care in differentiating their designs.

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

• Mobile Q2: Smartphone growth surges; iPad’s rule continues
• Tablet market to hit over 377 million units by 2016
• Tablets wars: Apple is from Venus, Amazon is from Mars

That’s going to depend on exactly what experience consumers are looking for. With Android 4.0, dual-core processor, two cameras and integrated GPS, the Galaxy Tab 2 is a low-cost Android tablet with few limitations. It can run any third party app from Google Play, take and sync pictures or be used as a GPS navigation device. The Kindle Fire and Nook Tablet are far more limited in what they can do out of the box but what they can do, they do very well.

Amazon did remove one limitation this week when it added support for in-app purchases. This could lead to a greater number of free third-party apps that make money through upgrades or additional content within the application. This “freemium” model has been supported by iOS and Android for some time and has begun to bring more money to developers over paid mobile apps. I also expect more Android developers to bring their apps into Amazon’s AppStore; good for Kindle Fire owners.

My latest Android gadget is similar to the Kindle Fire, in that you’d never know it actually runs on Android. I bought a MotoActv wearable device about a week ago, hoping to find a way to track my outdoor exercise without having to carry my smartphone and use its GPS. The MotoActv works quite well for this, but I also gained some unexpected benefits from my $199 purchase.

Because the MotoActv is crammed with sensors and radios — accelerometer, GPS, Bluetooth, Wi-Fi and FM radio — I’m actually wearing it from the time I wake until the time I sleep. The 1.6-inch device with capacitive touchscreen measures calories burned as well as steps taken, so I gain that health data.

It also has 8 GB of storage, so I’ve added several albums and use it to enjoy music as needed. And of course, when I run, I turn on the GPS radio and track my route, pace, and distance, plus my heart rate with an external heart rate monitor.

The MotoActv also works as a watch, complete with several difference faces to choose from. And when paired with a smartphone, it can receive notifications such as SMS messages, caller ID and calendar events. When the device launched last October, the notification feature was only supported on Motorola handsets. However, a software update earlier this month added support for all Android handsets.

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

• Tablet market to hit over 377 million units by 2016
• Is Android broken and if so, will Google fix it?
• CES 2012: a recap and analysis

The new Galaxy Tab 2, available April 22, looks similar to the original model, which I bought in late 2010. It’s slimmer, however, at 10.5 millimeters. Rounded corners take away the blockiness of its older brother. Samsung swapped out the old single-core processor and added a 1 GHz dual-core chip, but otherwise left much of the hardware same. Like the older model, the 7-inch display offers 1024 x 600 resolution, a 3.2 megapixel rear camera, VGA front-facing camera, and little else to differentiate the upgrade.

Samsung could have done more to advance this tablet, but it already has a far better — and more expensive — model with its Galaxy Tab 7.7. I purchased a Tab 7.7 from an importer earlier this year and it’s impressive: it’s thinner, uses a 1280 x 800 Super AMOLED Plus screen and a faster processor, which lets the tablet fly. But at $500 or more — an LTE version is available from Verizon Wireless for $499 on contract — it’s not a competitor to the $199 Kindle Fire. The Galaxy Tab 2 is, or at least, Samsung hopes it is.

For $50 over the price of a Kindle fire, you do get slightly better hardware and support for Android 4.0. Amazon’s Kindle Fire is based on the smartphone version of Android, but that’s not hurting sales. Why? Because the consumers buying the Kindle tablet aren’t buying it for Android; they’re buying it for easy access to Amazon’s content, along with occasional web browsing, email and app use.

You can access all of the same content on the Galaxy Tab 2 — minus Amazon Instant Video — and gain access to the full array of Android apps available through Google’s store. That’s actually a bad thing from some perspectives, but opinions vary. What you won’t get is the simple Amazon user interface, which is a custom launcher making it easy to get content.

So will the Galaxy Tab 2 make a dent in Amazon Kindle Fire sales, currently estimated to account for 14 percent of all tablets sold in the last quarter of 2011? I suspect not and here’s why. There are two types of customers for a 7-inch tablet: Those that want a full tablet experience with nearly unlimited potential and those that are happy to buy a simple experience that focuses on key activities such as content consumption, web browsing and mainstream app use.

The problem that Samsung may face is that there are far more people in the latter camp and Amazon’s Kindle Fire meets the needs of those in it. Specifications are irrelevant to this group; the experience and content availability are the “specs” that matter here. Sure, the geeks like me will be willing to pony up the extra $50 for a Galaxy Tab 2, but we’re looking for a tablet, not a typical consumer electronics device.

I’ll actually be watching closely to see how Samsung does with its new Galaxy Tab 2, but not because of Amazon or Samsung. Instead, the sales may provide some insight as to whether or not a rumored $199 Google Nexus Tablet will be a hit with consumers.

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

• Tablet market to hit over 377 million units by 2016
• Tablets wars: Apple is from Venus, Amazon is from Mars
• Is Android broken and if so, will Google fix it?