iPad

[Murdoc]

My name's not Jake,

Are you sure he wasn't just talking to Jake?

Also according to the comparisons 5 hours(Slate) vs 10 hours(ipad) is a huge difference to me. Maybe maybe that ten hours on the ipad is ideal.

[JonCole]

Also according to the comparisons 5 hours(Slate) vs 10 hours(ipad) is a huge difference to me. Maybe maybe that ten hours on the ipad is ideal.

Yes, it's absolutely a huge deal to me too. I get about 5 hours of battery life on my netbook right now, which is just under what I think I want... it's not enough for those overlong school days when I really need it. Not only that, but anecdontal reports of battery life have actually ranged from 8 hours to 12 hours, so I'm feeling really positive on that note.

[Irishjohn]

One of my major problems with the Slate is that it sticks with the shitty 1024x600 resolution that I honestly don't think is worth the purchase. One of the biggest selling points of the Slate is the Broadcom Crystal HD chip in there that allows for Flash acceleration supporting up to 1080p video, but with that screen you're farther away from 720p than even the iPad is.

Yeah, I'm bummed out by the resolution. Also, the HP Slate's battery life is going to be 5+ hours according to HP. That means three hours or so in reality. That makes the HP Slate a complete waste of time.

I think the iPad will make sense when it has a camera and costs $299. It sucks that Apple won't support Flash. But as far as games go, except for the occasional game that is able to use touch controls well, and adventure games, it's a waste. So many tech blog guys talk about the iPhone and now iPad as gaming devices but they don't think about games the way people that chat on this forum do. If you consider Farmville a game, then rock away on your iPad, but if I get one next year I can't imagine I'll be playing a lot of games on it.

[JonCole]

I think the iPad will make sense when it has a camera and costs $299. It sucks that Apple won't support Flash. But as far as games go, except for the occasional game that is able to use touch controls well, and adventure games, it's a waste. So many tech blog guys talk about the iPhone and now iPad as gaming devices but they don't think about games the way people that chat on this forum do. If you consider Farmville a game, then rock away on your iPad, but if I get one next year I can't imagine I'll be playing a lot of games on it.

Eh... I really contest that. Sure, most iPhone games aren't of the calibur of the best NDS games, but there are some solid titles that are pretty complementary to the 5-10 minute gaming sessions that you have on the run, waiting for food at a restaurant, taking an elevator, etc. Before Pokemon came around, I can honestly say that I had done more gaming on my iPod Touch than on my NDS.

[ThunderPeel2001]

One of my major problems with the Slate is that it sticks with the shitty 1024x600 resolution that I honestly don't think is worth the purchase.

The iPad's resolution is 1024x768

[JonCole]

The iPad's resolution is 1024x768

Have you ever used a 1024 x 600 resolution screen? Also, read the second half of that microparagraph (rebolded for emphasis):

One of the biggest selling points of the Slate is the Broadcom Crystal HD chip in there that allows for Flash acceleration supporting up to 1080p video, but with that screen you're farther away from 720p than even the iPad is.

[ThunderPeel2001]

Have you ever used a 1024 x 600 resolution screen? Also, read the second half of that microparagraph (rebolded for emphasis):

I shouldn't reply when I in work... My bad.

[Irishjohn]

Eh... I really contest that. Sure, most iPhone games aren't of the calibur of the best NDS games, but there are some solid titles that are pretty complementary to the 5-10 minute gaming sessions that you have on the run, waiting for food at a restaurant, taking an elevator, etc. Before Pokemon came around, I can honestly say that I had done more gaming on my iPod Touch than on my NDS.

Oh yeah, I won't disagree with the idea that people play games on their iPhones or iPod Touches. I just think that a small handful of games aside, there's not much there. There are a few games that use the platform well, but a lot of the time you're making allowances. It's great to have games right there on your phone, that you always have with you, but for me a DS or PSP offers a much better video game experience.

[elmuerte]

I think I'm more interested in the ICD Gemini than the HP Slate:

http://www.slashgear.com/icd-gemini-takes-on-ipad-1ghz-tegra-2-3g-multitouch-android-0680471/

[Irishjohn]

I think I'm more interested in the ICD Gemini than the HP Slate:

http://www.slashgear.com/icd-gemini-takes-on-ipad-1ghz-tegra-2-3g-multitouch-android-0680471/

That thing looks fantastic. I think Engadget wrote that this was still either at the conceptual stage, or a prototype though.

That gets you back to discussing the merits of Apple's App Store versus the Android Market, though!

[Jayel]

I think I'm more interested in the ICD Gemini than the HP Slate:

http://www.slashgear.com/icd-gemini-takes-on-ipad-1ghz-tegra-2-3g-multitouch-android-0680471/

That's the most ridiculously overfeatured slate pc I've ever seen. I'd be surprised if it's affordable.

[elmuerte]

That's the most ridiculously overfeatured slate pc I've ever seen. I'd be surprised if it's affordable.

That's what I fear too.

[Garple]

Toblix, I remember you saying a long time ago that you bought an iphone largely for gaming. How is that working out now that you've had it for a while?

Note: I'm not being snarky...I'm just curious. A lot of iphone games look pretty cool to me.

[SiN]

Re: HP Slate. Looks great on paper, won't be in practice. Numbers don't matter: it may be "faster" and have "more RAM", but in practice iPhone OS will run faster because it's optimized to run under constraint conditions. To bring the point home, compare the 600MHz iPhone 3GS to the 1GHz Nexus One. All reviews say the same thing: despite the 1GHz processor, the Nexus One actually runs slower than the 3GS. It's not about the numbers, it's what you do with it.

Also, my point about Windows Tablet Edition. Seriously, trying to make a tablet run on Windows is a dead end. Tablet Edition has existed for almost a decade, it hasn't caught on, and for good reasons. Windows just wasn't designed for touch. Design a new OS or just don't bother. Full stop.

Basically, the HP Slate is the device that all the tech nerds *think* they want. When it's released, the reviews will be so-so, the sales will be poor, and the tech nerds will be left confused, "It has multitasking, it runs Windows, how could this fail?" And they'll conclude that, "The iPad sold well because of brand name, not because it's better." It's frustrating to see this happen over and over again.

Mo

[toblix]

Toblix, I remember you saying a long time ago that you bought an iphone largely for gaming. How is that working out now that you've had it for a while?

I'm very happy with the purchase. As a gaming platform I think it's great, although the touch interface is more limiting than I expected at first. For example, I don't play any of the point & click adventures I bought (and I've bought pretty much all of them, because it's awesome to have Simon the Sorcerer on your phone), because of the whole finger-covering-where-you-click thing. The games I've played the most I think are Textropolis, Pinball Dreams, Pinball Fantasies and Plants vs Zombies. I don't play at home, but find short openings when I'm out and about. I also use the web more than I expected to (the browser is great), and Tweetie 2 is an excellent Twitter client.

However, I expect all this to change tomorrow, when multitasking, animated backgrounds, backround music, screensavers and Facebook integration are announced for iPhone OS 4.

[Hermie]

I thought the Monkey Island: SE solved the click problem decently with the push-around cursor, which worked fine except in puzzle with time pressure, and the fact that the double-click to quick action didn't always work (though supposedly they fixed that in an update?).

[elmuerte]

Re: HP Slate. Looks great on paper, won't be in practice. Numbers don't matter: it may be "faster" and have "more RAM", but in practice iPhone OS will run faster because it's optimized to run under constraint conditions. To bring the point home, compare the 600MHz iPhone 3GS to the 1GHz Nexus One. All reviews say the same thing: despite the 1GHz processor, the Nexus One actually runs slower than the 3GS. It's not about the numbers, it's what you do with it.

And perception is also a lot. The iPhone feels like it runs faster. This is due to different priorities in the OS. The Android gives a much lower priority to the user interface compared to other stuff on the system. For example, my music keeps playing without a hitch even though the UI is quite slow and almost unresponsive (I have a 1st gen Android, the dev phone 1).

Also, in general more and different stuff is running in the background on an Android (also an annoying part of a lot of Android applications).

In the end, you're compared apples and oranges and not 2 phones or 2 mobile operating systems.

[Jayel]

Re: HP Slate. Looks great on paper, won't be in practice. Numbers don't matter: it may be "faster" and have "more RAM", but in practice iPhone OS will run faster because it's optimized to run under constraint conditions. To bring the point home, compare the 600MHz iPhone 3GS to the 1GHz Nexus One. All reviews say the same thing: despite the 1GHz processor, the Nexus One actually runs slower than the 3GS. It's not about the numbers, it's what you do with it.

Not sure where you got that from... granted I've only read a handful of reviews of nexus one, but every review seems to praise its speed and snappiness. Sure, the same apps that are running with java bytecode would be slower than native code with a slower processor, but for stuff like web browsing:

http://blogs.computerworld.com/15875/ipad_vs_nexus_one_vs_iphone_3g?source=rss_blogs

Plus I've seen (slower) motorola droid running against 3gs in real life. seemed faster for most sites.

Basically, the HP Slate is the device that all the tech nerds *think* they want. When it's released, the reviews will be so-so, the sales will be poor, and the tech nerds will be left confused, "It has multitasking, it runs Windows, how could this fail?" And they'll conclude that, "The iPad sold well because of brand name, not because it's better." It's frustrating to see this happen over and over again.

For what it's worth, i'm a tech junkie and I think HP Slate will be a failure. It's the kind of device I'd actually find more useful, but i'm not deluded enough to think that it has any sort of mass appeal that ipad has. For example I'd probably buy Pandora over DS given the choice, but i would never think that Pandora would be more successful than DS.

Edited April 7, 2010 by Jayel

[Scrobbs]

Key phrase with that Gemini thing is 'conceptual'. It will never make it to market. Let's not forget the iPad is already released, with manufacturing geared up for capacity.

[Patters]

I don't understand why people seem to want a camera on these, of course a forward facing one can be used for video calls. I see no practical reason to have a rear camera.

[Murdoc]

I see no practical reason to have a rear camera.

Rear camera, Teeheehee...oh theres a reason!

[Erkki]

Yeah, the app rejections are definitely another thing that I don't like. For example, disallowing this:

http://www.intomobile.com/2010/03/04/tawkon-measures-iphone-radiation-wont-be-approved-by-apple.html

because it "would create confusion with iPhone owners from a usability perspective", but then allowing tons of utter crap...

[JonCole]

Yeah, the app rejections are definitely another thing that I don't like. For example, disallowing this:

http://www.intomobile.com/2010/03/04/tawkon-measures-iphone-radiation-wont-be-approved-by-apple.html

because it "would create confusion with iPhone owners from a usability perspective", but then allowing tons of utter crap...

I honestly think that Apple thinks almost purely in PR as far as app rejection goes. This is both the blessing and curse of mainstream appeal - I can guarantee that most people who use the iPhone don't recognize a huge distinction between Apple and the app developers. This is why Apple runs so much marketing on the various good apps via television ads and such... anything that bolsters the platform makes them look good in general.

On the other hand, anything that might cause stability problems, report inaccurate information, or make their own software look bad is subject to rejection, it seems. Essentially, wipe away all the bad eggs and false positives, and you're guaranteed successes despite the unnecessary casualties.

[Murdoc]

Yeah, the app rejections are definitely another thing that I don't like. For example, disallowing this:

http://www.intomobile.com/2010/03/04/tawkon-measures-iphone-radiation-wont-be-approved-by-apple.html

because it "would create confusion with iPhone owners from a usability perspective", but then allowing tons of utter crap...

Damn it, I just read the headline and thought immediately it dedicated radiation in the area, then thought how cool it would be if it had the sound from Half Life for that.

Now that would be a sweet/useless app... I wonder if we could even do the death tone if my heart stopped...hmmm

[Rueler]

However, I expect all this to change tomorrow, when multitasking, animated backgrounds, backround music, screensavers and Facebook integration are announced for iPhone OS 4.

Even if they do announce all of that tomorrow, I'm pretty sure we won't be getting it for a couple months.