Seek42
https://seek42.net:443/phpBB3/

Apple iPad
https://seek42.net:443/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=21773
Page 3 of 4

Author:  modernmystic [ Sat 04-10-2010 2:38PM ]
Post subject:  Re: Apple iPad

berto wrote:
ShadowCat38 wrote:
And my experience with netbooks has been forever shattered when my 1.6ghz atom-running Lenovo chopped when playing SD youtube and could barely handle using Facebook.

I'm just gonna focus on this part since that's really where I...um, give a shit, for lack of a better phrase. Maybe the lenovo had issues, but I can say that my passively cooled dell mini 9 can definitely play 480p videos and although I haven't tested it (what's the point on a screen that small?), people are reporting that 720p works as well and 1080p is even possible for the most part with a combo attack of an efficient media player using even more efficient external codecs.
As for flash were you able to try the newer flash 10.1 beta? It apparently helped out a lot. Again, haven't bothered to test that myself yet.

Author:  zeroluck [ Sat 04-10-2010 4:05PM ]
Post subject:  Re: Apple iPad

Cochise wrote:
people are reporting that 720p works as well and 1080p


maybe on an atom n330 dual core with the ion platform

Author:  LostBoyz [ Sat 04-10-2010 4:15PM ]
Post subject:  Re: Apple iPad

first stop calling it a tablet, because it isn't. It absolutely is a bigger ipod touch, the hardware and processor are all almost exactly the same architecture on a bigger screen. Does the bigger screen help you do better things? sure, but it is literally a bigger ipod touch.

Just because you can put text on it, does not make it an e-reader, and everyone I have heard talk about that feature says even though the thing only weighs 1.5lbs it still gets heavy to use to sit down and read for a long period of time. Its glossy and smudgy and has a non-ideal battery life for an e-reader type purpose (not saying its bad, but kindle can go days without recharging).

and the new generation of netbooks (which at most expensive run ~$500) are so much better at everything than the ipad, again just lacking the retard-esque os and 'touchiness'

it is the most beautiful pointless device of all time. especially considering the people that buy them have an iphone, ipod touch, and a macbook pro. But thats what fanboys are for right?

Author:  modernmystic [ Sat 04-10-2010 5:48PM ]
Post subject:  Re: Apple iPad

zeroluck wrote:
maybe on an atom n330 dual core with the ion platform

Nope.
Though the 1080p isn't perfect, with sound desync when there's high demand scenes such as some big action scene.
EDIT: might still be possible to glitch some with certain devices on 720p such as my passively cooled one.

Author:  el_lorenzo [ Sat 04-10-2010 5:53PM ]
Post subject:  Re: Apple iPad

Screw all your criticisms! All that matters is that it blends!

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lAl28d6tbko[/youtube]

Author:  zeroluck [ Sat 04-10-2010 7:52PM ]
Post subject:  Re: Apple iPad

refurb Dell XT tablet -- $649
Core 2 Duo U7700 1.3GHz ULV processor
ATI Radeon Xpress 1250 integrated graphics
2GB DDR2 SDRAM
1.8" 5400 rpm 120GB hard drive
12.1" WXGA (1280x800) LED-backlit (220 nits) display
Touchscreen and digitizer pen input
Mobile Broadband with EVDO Rev A service through Verizon Wireless or Sprint
Dell Wireless 802.11a/g/n
10/100/1000 Ethernet
54mm Express Card slot
3 x USB ports
SD Card slot
IEEE 1394 firewire
VGA-15 pin output
Microsoft Vista Business Edition
Weight: 3.57 lbs.
Dimensions: 1"H x 11.7"W x 8.6"D

eeePC tablet -- $377

(convertible atom netbook)

there is nothing else to be said

Author:  zeroluck [ Sat 04-10-2010 7:53PM ]
Post subject:  Re: Apple iPad

modernmystic wrote:
zeroluck wrote:
maybe on an atom n330 dual core with the ion platform

Nope.
ok i was wrong
EDIT: ok i was really wrong

Author:  berto [ Sat 04-10-2010 11:47PM ]
Post subject:  Re: Apple iPad

LostBoyz wrote:
first stop calling it a tablet, because it isn't. It absolutely is a bigger ipod touch, the hardware and processor are all almost exactly the same architecture on a bigger screen. Does the bigger screen help you do better things? sure, but it is literally a bigger ipod touch.

Just because you can put text on it, does not make it an e-reader, and everyone I have heard talk about that feature says even though the thing only weighs 1.5lbs it still gets heavy to use to sit down and read for a long period of time. Its glossy and smudgy and has a non-ideal battery life for an e-reader type purpose (not saying its bad, but kindle can go days without recharging).

and the new generation of netbooks (which at most expensive run ~$500) are so much better at everything than the ipad, again just lacking the retard-esque os and 'touchiness'

it is the most beautiful pointless device of all time. especially considering the people that buy them have an iphone, ipod touch, and a macbook pro. But thats what fanboys are for right?

First, stop saying it's a bigger iPod touch. Same hardware? Yeah it's close. But it performs immensely better (check the benchmarks) and the operating system is designed for a bigger screen -- which makes all the difference between the touch and the _tablet_. The tablet version of the OS is designed for the bigger screen, which I've already mentioned. Implying that it is just a bigger touch is pretty idiotic. If anything, the touch could be considered a smaller tablet. Last I checked, the "touch" wasn't a type of computer.

And it is an e-reader. The fact that it has an application specifically designed for viewing and purchasing books from online encourages that fact. To claim the tablet is a bigger touch because it is functionally the same and then say that the iPad is not an e-reader even though the functionality is the same is pretty contradictory. And anyone that can't hold 1.5 lbs needs to hit a fucking gym. Regardless, I've played on it for an hour at a time with no issues of holding it. The battery life gets 10 solid hours of use and can sit a pretty decent time in stand-by. As far as the smudgy finger prints, yeah they are there, but you can't actually see them looking directly at the screen when the screen is on.

Lastly, your arguments are zzz, Scott. Step up your game.

Author:  LostBoyz [ Sun 04-11-2010 9:33AM ]
Post subject:  Re: Apple iPad

but you haven't refuted anything I've said. You say its not a bigger ipod touch, but then say it is by conversely saying the ipod touch is just a smaller ipad. It is a more capable, less portable ipod touch. The ipod touch has a kindle app where you can buy and read books, but we both don't consider that an e-reader so there goes that argument. No one said they couldn't hold the thing for a long period of time to read a book, but merely that it became uncomfortable compared to other e-readers and books.


You sidestepped it being grossly overpriced and under equipped, and the fact it is not a tablet. Actually I couldn't find any mention of it being called a tablet on the apple site (http://www.apple.com/search/?q=tablet&sec=global), its merely the media who are calling it this. Though I'm not sure if there is a strict 'what makes a tablet' criteria, but the fact you can't set it down and use a stylus (natively) to say do some graphics work just makes it a failure on that front.

Author:  blitzvergnugen [ Sun 04-11-2010 10:24AM ]
Post subject:  Re: Apple iPad

Pretty sure that one of the main parts of an eReader is having e-ink...
wikipedia wrote:
An ebook reader, also called an ebook device or ereader, is an electronic device that is designed primarily for the purpose of reading digital books and periodicals and uses e-ink technology to display content to readers.

And if an application that allows you to read ebooks is all that's required to be an ereader, than the iPod Touch, my computer, my laptop, a pda, a nintendo ds can all be ereaders. Of course most of those are terrible when compared to an actual book. Sure it may have 10 hours of batt life, but that's not going to get anywhere close to a real ereader.

Also: what scott said

Author:  amd2800barton [ Sun 04-11-2010 12:24PM ]
Post subject:  Re: Apple iPad

Sorry, berto. LB and Blitz +1.

Author:  TopFuel1471 [ Sun 04-11-2010 4:01PM ]
Post subject:  Re: Apple iPad

hehehehehe

Image

Author:  Chankster [ Sun 04-11-2010 4:43PM ]
Post subject:  Re: Apple iPad

berto wrote:
First, stop saying it's a bigger iPod touch. Same hardware? Yeah it's close. But it performs immensely better (check the benchmarks) and the operating system is designed for a bigger screen -- which makes all the difference between the touch and the _tablet_. The tablet version of the OS is designed for the bigger screen, which I've already mentioned. Implying that it is just a bigger touch is pretty idiotic. If anything, the touch could be considered a smaller tablet. Last I checked, the "touch" wasn't a type of computer.


But it is (a larger iPod Touch). They didn't take OS X and make it more "iPad friendly" they took the iPhone OS and scaled it up. It still has an almost identical UI. Many of the elements were taken directly from the iPhone UI. The only difference is a larger screen and better "performance". Looking at the features there isn't anything the iPod Touch can't already do on a smaller screen (aside from accessibility, but really...).

The iPad is a large iPod Touch. End of story.

Author:  berto [ Mon 04-12-2010 5:48AM ]
Post subject:  Re: Apple iPad

LostBoyz wrote:
but you haven't refuted anything I've said. You say its not a bigger ipod touch, but then say it is by conversely saying the ipod touch is just a smaller ipad. It is a more capable, less portable ipod touch. The ipod touch has a kindle app where you can buy and read books, but we both don't consider that an e-reader so there goes that argument. No one said they couldn't hold the thing for a long period of time to read a book, but merely that it became uncomfortable compared to other e-readers and books.


You sidestepped it being grossly overpriced and under equipped, and the fact it is not a tablet. Actually I couldn't find any mention of it being called a tablet on the apple site (http://www.apple.com/search/?q=tablet&sec=global), its merely the media who are calling it this. Though I'm not sure if there is a strict 'what makes a tablet' criteria, but the fact you can't set it down and use a stylus (natively) to say do some graphics work just makes it a failure on that front.

I don't think it's possible to refute anything you've said because these are both our opinions. I will concede to yours and Alex's points of not being an e-reader (mostly Alex because I wasn't aware of the e-ink requirement). However, it works well enough for me as one. As far as being uncomfortable, I guess? I've had no problems finding a comfortable position I could sit in. And I'll only concede to it being 'a bigger iPod touch' because it does look like one and run the same OS. Now as for intended use, performance, and the shift towards programming for the bigger screen, I don't think so.

I don't think I sidestepped it because I specifically said it wasn't a great deal. I'd be the first to admit it is pretty pricey, but I'm not so sure it's under-equipped. It does what I need it to. And you're arguing that it isn't a tablet, so how can you compare it to tablets that are coming out and say it is under-equipped? You can't have it both ways. Not much to stand on, but the first sentence: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPad.

Author:  LostBoyz [ Mon 04-12-2010 3:22PM ]
Post subject:  Re: Apple iPad

Well i guess wikipedia knows more about apple's website, also it calls it a 'tablet computer' rather than a 'tablet pc.' I was saying that in the netbook realm $500 goes a lot further. I realize its not a netbook but down to functionality they have the same purpose and market.

I guess i shouldn't have compared it to a tablet, my only point was that it is not a tablet.

Page 3 of 4 All times are UTC - 6 hours
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/