Wish I could pass along word of this review without sarcasm (sorry, that’s a lie; I love sarcasm), but the review is kind of schizophrenic. On one hand, the reviewer specifies he doesn’t want to “drag out this review with a pointless description of Windows 7′s strengths and shortcomings in the tablet form” (emphasis mine). Yet, he starts off talking about Windows, mentions it repeatedly through out, and later asks “is a Windows 7 tablet right for you?” How should I know? You didn’t describe the strengths and weaknesses of Windows 7 in tablet form.
Is it good as far as Windows 7 tablets go? Did the Nav 9’s unique desktop switching feature work smoothly? Was the resistive touch as smooth as capacitive? How about the palm rejection when writing on the screen? It has a resistive touchscreen that supports two-finger multi-touch. That’s a noteworthy feature. That’s special. I want to know more about it than “accurate and responsive.”
There is good information about screen viewability, build quality, and HD video playback. He specifies that it feels good in hand, but otherwise, he might as well be reviewing a netbook, which he cites as a good comparison to the Nav 9. He goes so far as to conclude: “It’s a netbook with a resistive touchscreen, and that pretty much tells the whole story.” And there’s my short version of the long version.
Side note: Yeah, I know I’m being a grumpy bear too. I apologize for the attitude, but honestly, I don’t feel like I know the device any better after reading the review. Hate it or love it, that’s all I want from any review.