or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › Dual core SGX543 dramatically boosts iPad 2 graphics
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Dual core SGX543 dramatically boosts iPad 2 graphics - Page 4

post #121 of 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by megasmitty View Post

My reasoning is if there is no competition then the innovation my start to lag.

Yup, just like all that innovation that happened before the iPod, iPhone and iPad

This is the lamest meme running and I'm so sick of it...
post #122 of 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by CIM View Post

iPad 2 xooms past the competition.

I see what you did there.
post #123 of 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sevenfeet View Post

OK Mel, I went back to see if I could find the original WSJ article and here it is from Jan. 5, 2010:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...Tabs%3Darticle

I don't subscribe so I can't read past the first two paragraphs which don't mention the price. But I can read the comments section and many on the first page react to the thought of paying $1000 for it. Since you subscribe, can you confirm the contents of the article?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sevenfeet View Post

Thanks for the clarification. I stand corrected.

Still, for me it was worth bringing up just to see this in the comments section:
Quote:
If you want to see if there is a tablet PC in your future just visit your local Best Buy store and try this HP model with Win7.

You will see its the best of both the PC and Iphone in a 12 in. form factor and only $850.


If only we knew! We could have seen the future of tablet computing a year and a half ago at Best Buy and we wouldn't have had to spend all this time waiting for and analyzing the iPad and iPad2...
Progress is a comfortable disease
--e.e.c.
Reply
Progress is a comfortable disease
--e.e.c.
Reply
post #124 of 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

I don't know what he meant. I know what he wrote.

But I didn't even mention the hinge magnets; solipsism had me exactly right.

In any case, my own iPad 2 hasn't arrived yet, so I was just briefly using a friend's. His seemed a little awkward but generally firm. That could be a function of my grip at the time I was using it (left-handed, but I'm a righty) or just differences in magnet strengths. After all, some iPad's have the LCD bleed issue but most don't. If (as solipsism mentioned) the 'feature' is unintentional, then that would explain why it's highly variable (assuming it is).
post #125 of 161
"If you walk into an Apple store on a typical day, the place isn't packed with fandrois. It's crowded by ordinary folks who buy Apple stuff because it works for them enough that their geek friend doesn't have to explain it to them."

So true! I am not a geek. I have no interest -and when it gets right down to it, I have no head for what goes on under the "hood." I have learned and am learning as the years go by, but I am still at a level where I can grasp only the most broadly defined concepts. But that is enough, as it turns out.

My first computer was a Zeos (forget the model etc.) in 1993, which meant that I could forever leave behind the C:/ thank God! Using windows, however, did not mean that I could leave behind the need to have geek friends help me, again and again, to get things to work properly. But in 1995 I bought my first Mac and was amazed that computers could actually work as advertised.

Today I have a 2nd generation iPod and I am using an iMac with a G5 chip. This year I will be upgrading my computer to an iMac or a PowerBook or a MacBook Air -choices, choices, choices and ultimately I will be getting an iPad2. We have come a long way baby!
post #126 of 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigpics View Post

Costs more, runs slower.

Now there's a great ad slogan.....

That used to be the slogan used by PCs about Macs. And it was true, but the Mac was till the better machine and had the better OS. So what's your point?
post #127 of 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alladdinn View Post

"If you walk into an Apple store on a typical day, the place isn't packed with fandrois. It's crowded by ordinary folks who buy Apple stuff because it works for them enough that their geek friend doesn't have to explain it to them."

So true! I am not a geek. I have no interest -and when it gets right down to it, I have no head for what goes on under the "hood." I have learned and am learning as the years go by, but I am still at a level where I can grasp only the most broadly defined concepts. But that is enough, as it turns out.

My first computer was a Zeos (forget the model etc.) in 1993, which meant that I could forever leave behind the C:/ thank God! Using windows, however, did not mean that I could leave behind the need to have geek friends help me, again and again, to get things to work properly. But in 1995 I bought my first Mac and was amazed that computers could actually work as advertised.

Today I have a 2nd generation iPod and I am using an iMac with a G5 chip. This year I will be upgrading my computer to an iMac or a PowerBook or a MacBook Air -choices, choices, choices and ultimately I will be getting an iPad2. We have come a long way baby!

Let's not forget that since you started buying Macs, the quality of ALL computers has increased significantly. Even since you got your iMac G5, Microsoft has released two new versions of Windows, with the latest one being extremely stable and easy to use.
post #128 of 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by lkrupp View Post

That used to be the slogan used by PCs about Macs. And it was true, but the Mac was till the better machine and had the better OS. So what's your point?

I think his point is that the Xoom tablet is slower and costs more than the iPad 2. Which it is and does.

I'd like to add that in this case, the iPad 2 is also the better machine and has the better tablet OS. The fact that it's selling out in many locations while people couldn't care less about Android tablets proves that. And let's not even get into form factor here.

Hell, Honeycomb is a mess. When Google gets around to patching all of the crash bugs, they still have the fact that many users find it to be way too complicated.

http://www.afterdawn.com/news/articl...comb_is_a_mess

Quote:
The analyst calls the Honeycomb interface "extremely complicated and confusing, and does not come naturally you really have to work on it," citing conversations with Xoom owners.
post #129 of 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by neiltc13 View Post

Let's not forget that since you started buying Macs, the quality of ALL computers has increased significantly. Even since you got your iMac G5, Microsoft has released two new versions of Windows, with the latest one being extremely stable and easy to use.

I'm using Windows 7 as I type this. I love it (you have to understand I was stuck with Vista before this) and it is definitely more stable than many previous versions of Windows (XP excluded, since it was by far the most stable in my experience). But easy to use? No. Easier than previous versions, yes. But easy? Compared to my wife's Mac? Not even close, IMO.
post #130 of 161
But, but the Xoom has more ram, how could the ipad run circles around it?

Seriously , for some reasons some geeks out there have a ram fetish. Maybe they got beaten by ram simms when they were young...

Fyi paging into SSD barely slow down the system compare to paging into a HD. This is why devices with SSD dont slow down to a crowl when they run out of memory.
post #131 of 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by guch20 View Post

I think his point is that the Xoom tablet is slower and costs more than the iPad 2. Which it is and does.

Hell, Honeycomb is a mess. When Google gets around to patching all of the crash bugs, they still have the fact that many users find it to be way too complicated.

http://www.afterdawn.com/news/articl...comb_is_a_mess


Whether he is right or not, quoting financial analysts talking out of their ass isn't worth shit.
post #132 of 161
Motorola was pretty much forced to launch a bunch of half-finished products --- because they were splitting the company into 2 in the stock market. The split would have never taken place if those launches weren't announced.
post #133 of 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

Very funny. If it were only true.

Did you just come here to troll. I'm the wrong person to troll. Do it again, and you're gone.

I wish you and the other moderators would use that hammer with all trolls, not just those that happen to tick you off or wound your personal pride.

In other words, be consistent. It helps AI's credibility.
post #134 of 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by sprockkets View Post

Whether he is right or not, quoting financial analysts talking out of their ass isn't worth shit.

Quoting financial analysts who have gotten their information directly from Xoom users is worth something. It may not paint the complete picture but it does echo what many other users have said and it gives some idea as to why the Xoom tablet is selling like shit.

Of course, judging by your other argumentative posts in this thread, my guess is you're not after any real truth or facts. You just want to argue your flaccid stance and bicker about pointless insipid bullshit, like who really wrote some article nobody read on some techgeek website only ubernerds care about.

Good for you. Way to live.
post #135 of 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post

I'm a truly evil and sadistic person who takes great delight in the misery and suffering of others and I actually spent about 30-45 minutes last night at a few different android and xoom forums just browsing, reading and thoroughly enjoying myself. It was pure comedy gold, much better than any tv sitcom. Some of those people are truly delusional, bordering on mentally ill, with a few of them being truly psychotic.

I learned that it's not necessary for any game to have more than 25 FPS, as the human eye can't detect more than that anyway.

I also learned that the smoothness and better response of iOS is an over hyped feature since people don't coat their floors with wax and slide around on it. Hence, smoothness and having no lag is a useless feature.

I also learned that engadget, anandtech and a bunch of other sites are really paid shills for Apple and that there is a huge conspiracy taking place against Android.

I could go on, but if anybody is interested in a few laughs and LOLs, then head on over to any of those android and xoom forums and read for yourself. There's also massive infighting taking place, with a few people there recognizing reality and admitting that the iPad is superior VS those who refuse to accept that fact. If I had just spent $800 on a buggy piece of junk, I might be upset too.

LOL. Thanks for the research

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #136 of 161
On the subject of framerates: I remember reading an articlesorry I can't link to it, but this was in the Dead Tree Eraabout an experiment Stephen Spielberg conducted. Of course everybody knows 24 fps is inadequate for rapid movement, so he wanted to see what was really the optimum framerate for action movies.

He filmed a bunch of supposedly exciting footagebattle scenes, flying, roller-coaster rides, etc.at a variety of framerates. Then he showed them to a number of volunteers after wiring them up like a polygraphheart rate, respiration, skin galvanic response. He found that people's measurable "excitement" did indeed increase with framerate, presumably because it seemed more realistic or involving, until he hit 60 fps. After that there was no further improvement.

As a result of that, I consider it an observed scientific fact that 60 fps is the most the human visual system can handle, and anything over that is overkillor just one of those meaningless specs that geeks like to quote.

Of course, I could be wrong. When stereo was invented, the brain wasn't supposed to be able to detect different arrival times at each ear, just differing loudness. That turned out to be baloney. Also, the TV I'm looking at right now actually has 1920 X 1080 pixels on the screen. (That was a prerequisite for me, so I'm a very late adopter on HDTV.) In this area we have five 1080i channels and five 720p channels. Doing the arithmetic, from this distance I shouldn't be able to resolve 720 lines, let alone 1080, but I can tell the 720p channels appear dull and lifeless compared with the 1080i ones. I can't explain it, but it's an observed fact for me.

I think someone should revisit Spielberg's experiment in the electronic era. A question that occurs to me is: these new 3D TVs think they need 120 Hz for 3D, but I wonder if alternating 30 fps per eye would add up to a perceived 60 fps?
post #137 of 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bageljoey View Post

I agree, I don't have much interest in comparisons to Xoom--it is only half baked and probably only mentioned by Anand to have another graphics processing data point.

But, my question is this: What does this all mean for the mythical Retina Display summer update? If Apple was able to produce (in quantity) the double resolution/quadruple pixel count screen and add an HD line to the iPod2 without any other internal changes, how will it affect performance? I don't know enough about these things to speculate myself, but I am curious. Would it drag the iPad2's graphics performance back down or would it only affect certain functions?
I understand drawing triangles is drawing triangles no regardless of pixel count, but the contention that Xoom should get a break because of its pixel count has me wondering...

You make an excellent point. I think they've been making "retina" displays for a long time now. It all has to do with "yield". So they try to make 'retina' screens for the iPad... They only get one out of 10, per say. Bad yield right... no. They take what they can from that and put it in the iPhone or iPod touch.

They have been building them for a long time now. The so called 'rejects' end up in the phone or touch. It gets more complicated than that, but I believe they are building up supply. Who knows, by the time they release it, it may be a 9 out of 10 yield....
post #138 of 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lukeskymac View Post

I think you mean 30 fps. Besides, the ideal thing is that the average frame rate should be around 40fps, that way you know that when you get to a very action-packed part of a game (in other words, lots of explosions), the frame rate won't drop below 24fps.

Did you read the same post? He was mocking the folks that wrote that.
From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've used them all.
Long on AAPL so biased
"Google doesn't sell you anything, they just sell you!"
Reply
From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've used them all.
Long on AAPL so biased
"Google doesn't sell you anything, they just sell you!"
Reply
post #139 of 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post

Did you read the same post? He was mocking the folks that wrote that.

On frame rates... When I'm gaming I need to see a minimum average of 45fps. Some of the people on the Xoom etc. forums were apparently claiming "25 fps is smooth enough". If so, they are delusional.
post #140 of 161
It is much more complicated. Experiments with film have to do with shutter angle which complicates things. I know for example watching sports on my Samsung 46" needs 100hz when watching football (soccer). The flight of the ball through the air is distinctively smooth and not choppy. Some of the 120hz etc can be gimmicky but done right eg. by Samsung I can never go back to watching sports (a) not in HD and (b) not at least as 100hz.

There are many instances IMO of modern visual input where the brain can detect anomalies even at 100hz depending very much on the content.

In fact, 24fps film at the cinema is something I find quite distracting due to the projector flicker. Digital projection is the way to go.

Whatever it is, times are changing a lot. One thing though, watching 24fps film at 60hz or more makes it looks like video and hence there is still that "magic" of 24fps film.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mac-sochist View Post

On the subject of framerates: I remember reading an article—sorry I can't link to it, but this was in the Dead Tree Era™—about an experiment Stephen Spielberg conducted. Of course everybody knows 24 fps is inadequate for rapid movement, so he wanted to see what was really the optimum framerate for action movies.

He filmed a bunch of supposedly exciting footage—battle scenes, flying, roller-coaster rides, etc.—at a variety of framerates. Then he showed them to a number of volunteers after wiring them up like a polygraph—heart rate, respiration, skin galvanic response. He found that people's measurable "excitement" did indeed increase with framerate, presumably because it seemed more realistic or involving, until he hit 60 fps. After that there was no further improvement.

As a result of that, I consider it an observed scientific fact that 60 fps is the most the human visual system can handle, and anything over that is overkill—or just one of those meaningless specs that geeks like to quote.

Of course, I could be wrong. When stereo was invented, the brain wasn't supposed to be able to detect different arrival times at each ear, just differing loudness. That turned out to be baloney. Also, the TV I'm looking at right now actually has 1920 X 1080 pixels on the screen. (That was a prerequisite for me, so I'm a very late adopter on HDTV.) In this area we have five 1080i channels and five 720p channels. Doing the arithmetic, from this distance I shouldn't be able to resolve 720 lines, let alone 1080, but I can tell the 720p channels appear dull and lifeless compared with the 1080i ones. I can't explain it, but it's an observed fact for me.

I think someone should revisit Spielberg's experiment in the electronic era. A question that occurs to me is: these new 3D TVs think they need 120 Hz for 3D, but I wonder if alternating 30 fps per eye would add up to a perceived 60 fps?
post #141 of 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by guch20 View Post

I'm using Windows 7 as I type this. I love it (you have to understand I was stuck with Vista before this) and it is definitely more stable than many previous versions of Windows (XP excluded, since it was by far the most stable in my experience). But easy to use? No. Easier than previous versions, yes. But easy? Compared to my wife's Mac? Not even close, IMO.

Windows 7 is the arguably the best Windows ever made. But it is defintiely not the best OS ever made. I'm getting sick of the Windows 7 UI after a few years, actually. There is something so timeless about the Mac, even OS 10.3 or System 9 or whatever.
post #142 of 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by warpdag View Post

They actually have a video using OpenGL here where you can see the difference: http://www.iosnoops.com/2011/03/13/i...nchmark-tests/

Great stuff. This is a big jump in iPad graphics, especially once game developers start optimising for it.
post #143 of 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lukeskymac View Post

24 FPS is used in movies, AFAIK, and the real "human eye can't see the difference beyond taht" number is 60 FPS...

(Last serial post, I promise) ... 24 FPS is the MINIMUM for people to perceive smooth motion. With the advent of computer games, etc. people can discern 30, 60, 100 fps.
post #144 of 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mac-sochist View Post

On the subject of framerates: I remember reading an article—sorry I can't link to it, but this was in the Dead Tree Era™—about an experiment Stephen Spielberg conducted. Of course everybody knows 24 fps is inadequate for rapid movement, so he wanted to see what was really the optimum framerate for action movies.

He filmed a bunch of supposedly exciting footage—battle scenes, flying, roller-coaster rides, etc.—at a variety of framerates. Then he showed them to a number of volunteers after wiring them up like a polygraph—heart rate, respiration, skin galvanic response. He found that people's measurable "excitement" did indeed increase with framerate, presumably because it seemed more realistic or involving, until he hit 60 fps. After that there was no further improvement.

As a result of that, I consider it an observed scientific fact that 60 fps is the most the human visual system can handle, and anything over that is overkill—or just one of those meaningless specs that geeks like to quote.

Of course, I could be wrong. When stereo was invented, the brain wasn't supposed to be able to detect different arrival times at each ear, just differing loudness. That turned out to be baloney. Also, the TV I'm looking at right now actually has 1920 X 1080 pixels on the screen. (That was a prerequisite for me, so I'm a very late adopter on HDTV.) In this area we have five 1080i channels and five 720p channels. Doing the arithmetic, from this distance I shouldn't be able to resolve 720 lines, let alone 1080, but I can tell the 720p channels appear dull and lifeless compared with the 1080i ones. I can't explain it, but it's an observed fact for me.

I think someone should revisit Spielberg's experiment in the electronic era. A question that occurs to me is: these new 3D TVs think they need 120 Hz for 3D, but I wonder if alternating 30 fps per eye would add up to a perceived 60 fps?

Doug Trumbull, the great film effects artist who created the Star Gate sequence for 2001, the spacecraft for Close Encounters and a lot of the effects in Blade Runner (among a great deal of other notable work) at one point was trying to get his "Showscan" process off the ground.

The story goes that he was editing some 70mm footage shot at high speed on a flatbed, fast forwarding through a sequence, and was struck by how footage shot at high speeds viewed at high speeds (which then appears to run at "normal" speed, instead of slow motion) took on an almost 3D quality. His subsequent experimentation led him to conclude that the optimal effect was achieved on 70mm film shot and viewed at 60fps.

He directed Natalie Wood's last movie, "Brainstorm", intending it to be a showcase for the new process (with most of the film shot and projected conventionally and "brainstorm" sequences, depicting direct experience of other people's memories, in Showscan) but he couldn't get enough theater owners to invest in the considerable expense of retrofitting their projectors. He went on to use Showscan for showrides in amusement parks.

I've always wondered why, given the change over to digital acquisition and projection, there hasn't been a reinvestigation of increasing frame rates for both shooting and projection this way. There aren't any electromechanical issues as in film projection, doubling your data storage costs isn't particularly burdensome, and it gives you denser information per second (with more visible impact) than just boosting resolution. It certainly would be easier to implement (and probably easier to enjoy) than the benighted 3D craze.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #145 of 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

Doug Trumbull, the great film effects artist who created the Star Gate sequence for 2001, the spacecraft for Close Encounters and a lot of the effects in Blade Runner (among a great deal of other notable work) at one point was trying to get his "Showscan" process off the ground.

The story goes that he was editing some 70mm footage shot at high speed on a flatbed, fast forwarding through a sequence, and was struck by how footage shot at high speeds viewed at high speeds (which then appears to run at "normal" speed, instead of slow motion) took on an almost 3D quality. His subsequent experimentation led him to conclude that the optimal effect was achieved on 70mm film shot and viewed at 60fps.

He directed Natalie Wood's last movie, "Brainstorm", intending it to be a showcase for the new process (with most of the film shot and projected conventionally and "brainstorm" sequences, depicting direct experience of other people's memories, in Showscan) but he couldn't get enough theater owners to invest in the considerable expense of retrofitting their projectors. He went on to use Showscan for showrides in amusement parks.

I've always wondered why, given the change over to digital acquisition and projection, there hasn't been a reinvestigation of increasing frame rates for both shooting and projection this way. There aren't any electromechanical issues as in film projection, doubling your data storage costs isn't particularly burdensome, and it gives you denser information per second (with more visible impact) than just boosting resolution. It certainly would be easier to implement (and probably easier to enjoy) than the benighted 3D craze.

Thanks for the history. It actually appears that we're going backwards: It seems to be a little-known fact that Blu-Ray players displaying 1080-line material are limited to 24 fps. If your TV can't switch to that framerate, or the player and TV can't handshake on it, the output defaults to 720p at 30 fps.

I always wondered what the 120 Hz refresh rate on new TVs was all about when 60 is already overkill for the signals they're displaying. I finally realized it was to resolve this problemif the incoming signal is 30 fps, each frame will be refreshed 4 times, if it's 24 fps, 5 times. The Player doesn't have to know anything.
post #146 of 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

* Xoom has one model with a second one planned for WiFi with no release date, right? Only one Playbook planned, right? And the Galaxy Tab only has one, right? The Asus tablets are the only I can think of that have any diversity, but its not capacity diversity, but unique qualities to the OS type and/or casing for specific usage needs. At least the Asus tablets all have IPS panels. Go Asus!

Speaking of Asus, remember this quote from Asus chairman Jonney Shih last month?

http://www.computerworld.com/s/artic...2&pageNumber=1

"We already know some of the details of that device, such as what kind of processor they chose. We very carefully chose our tablet processor, the Nvidia Tegra 2, and to really compete it will take [Apple] some time. You know, [Nvidia] is well known for graphics."

Seems he didn't know as much about the processor as he thought. The Tegra 2 bandwagon that every non-iPad tablet is on doesn't look so exciting now, does it?
post #147 of 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

I wish you and the other moderators would use that hammer with all trolls, not just those that happen to tick you off or wound your personal pride.

In other words, be consistent. It helps AI's credibility.

Yes I agree.
And what about the blatant racists., they get immunity.
You Americans only see coloured racism, but what about the other kind.
Some Finn doesn't like Russians and made nasty comments.
Why? This is a tech blog. I posted to this creep to watch itself, and it got even nastier.
I complained to the moderators but they replied it was okay and it was allowed to post as such. See double standards. What irks one person may not irk another.
post #148 of 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

I wish you and the other moderators would use that hammer with all trolls, not just those that happen to tick you off or wound your personal pride.

In other words, be consistent. It helps AI's credibility.

I couldn't agree more!
See, in the record business, you can show someone your song, and they don’t copy it. In the tech business, you show somebody your idea, and they steal it. (Jimmy Iovine)
Reply
See, in the record business, you can show someone your song, and they don’t copy it. In the tech business, you show somebody your idea, and they steal it. (Jimmy Iovine)
Reply
post #149 of 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by artificialintel View Post

But I didn't even mention the hinge magnets; solipsism had me exactly right.

In any case, my own iPad 2 hasn't arrived yet, so I was just briefly using a friend's. His seemed a little awkward but generally firm. That could be a function of my grip at the time I was using it (left-handed, but I'm a righty) or just differences in magnet strengths. After all, some iPad's have the LCD bleed issue but most don't. If (as solipsism mentioned) the 'feature' is unintentional, then that would explain why it's highly variable (assuming it is).

Sorry friend, but you did. The hinge magnet is the same one holding it to the back. If that's not what you meant, then it wasn't clear. There is no other magnet holding it to the back. The magnets that hold it closed to the front have no effect when it's turned to the rear.

"The blue cover attaches to the back using the same magnet (I think) as it uses to control the on/off function of the front. "
post #150 of 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by neiltc13 View Post

Let's not forget that since you started buying Macs, the quality of ALL computers has increased significantly. Even since you got your iMac G5, Microsoft has released two new versions of Windows, with the latest one being extremely stable and easy to use.

And no great advance either. Even Ballmer announced it as being"Vista done right". Great campaign slogan.
post #151 of 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

Sorry friend, but you did. The hinge magnet is the same one holding it to the back. If that's not what you meant, then it wasn't clear. There is no other magnet holding it to the back. The magnets that hold it closed to the front have no effect when it's turned to the rear.

"The blue cover attaches to the back using the same magnet (I think) as it uses to control the on/off function of the front. "

In my leather case, when I flip the cover around the magnets at the distal end of the cover stick to the back at the posterior end just behind the volume buttons and mute switch. As previously stated, it’s not a good hold but it stays up fine providing I have some support on the two innermost medial segments of the cover.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #152 of 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by sprockkets View Post

Whether he is right or not, quoting financial analysts talking out of their ass isn't worth shit.

Except that reviewers are saying the same thing. And, more importantly, reviewers are techno geeks. It's what they do, and love. For them, a geeky UI is great. Look at what they said about the Palm Pre and WebOS. But WebOS is terrible for everyone else. It's too complex, and isn't obvious. What I've been reading about Honeycomb seems to be similar. Once you figure it out, it's fine. But the average person buying these things doesn't want to have to figure it out. Honeycomb is much more complex than Android.

A financial analyst is closer to the average person as far as geekiness goes. If he finds it to be confusing, then it's more likely the average person will as well.

And you're talking out of your ass as well, because I'm willing to bet dollars to donuts that you haven't used it, or you would have said so. It's too late now to pretend you have.
post #153 of 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

I wish you and the other moderators would use that hammer with all trolls, not just those that happen to tick you off or wound your personal pride.

In other words, be consistent. It helps AI's credibility.

I try. I really do. But one post isn't a troll. It's stupid to try it with a mod though.
post #154 of 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aeolian View Post

You make an excellent point. I think they've been making "retina" displays for a long time now. It all has to do with "yield". So they try to make 'retina' screens for the iPad... They only get one out of 10, per say. Bad yield right... no. They take what they can from that and put it in the iPhone or iPod touch.

They have been building them for a long time now. The so called 'rejects' end up in the phone or touch. It gets more complicated than that, but I believe they are building up supply. Who knows, by the time they release it, it may be a 9 out of 10 yield....

I don't understand what you're trying to say here. What does a retina display for the iPad have to do with retina displays for the iPhone? There's nothing in common between the displays.
post #155 of 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by White Rabbit View Post

Yes I agree.
And what about the blatant racists., they get immunity.
You Americans only see coloured racism, but what about the other kind.
Some Finn doesn't like Russians and made nasty comments.
Why? This is a tech blog. I posted to this creep to watch itself, and it got even nastier.
I complained to the moderators but they replied it was okay and it was allowed to post as such. See double standards. What irks one person may not irk another.

Quote:
Originally Posted by newbee View Post

I couldn't agree more!

It depends on the remark. Some are really bad, and others aren't. If I seen something that's bad, I'll remove it. But we don't have enough mods, and some things go unnoticed. Some people complain about very minor remarks as well. We can't remove something just because someone complains about it. It's a judgement call.
post #156 of 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

In my leather case, when I flip the cover around the magnets at the distal end of the cover stick to the back at the posterior end just behind the volume buttons and mute switch. As previously stated, it’s not a good hold but it stays up fine providing I have some support on the two innermost medial segments of the cover.

Not at all for the poly covers. There is just the slightest magnetic attraction from the metal from behind the screen, but there is no way that I can get it to stick even lightly.

I don't know what you mean by support. If it needs support to stick, then it isn't sticking.
post #157 of 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

I don't know what you mean by support. If it needs support to stick, then it isn't sticking.

I have to hold the iPad in some way, with my left or right hand. If I try to hold the iPad with a finger attempting to only allow the cover to stick to the back panel without any support (I.e.: a hand) it wont hold. The full weight of the cover is too much for the magnet. However, if I hold it naturally with my right hand Im then pressing it against the magnet which makes it a moot point. If I hold it with my left hand it will hold on the right side, providing Im at least holding at least a tiny portion of the 2nd cover segment from the medial end. If Im only holding one of the leather segments it will flip down as soon as I move it briskly.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #158 of 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

I have to hold the iPad in some way, with my left or right hand. If I try to hold the iPad with a finger attempting to only allow the cover to stick to the back panel without any support (I.e.: a hand) it wont hold. The full weight of the cover is too much for the magnet. However, if I hold it naturally with my right hand Im then pressing it against the magnet which makes it a moot point. If I hold it with my left hand it will hold on the right side, providing Im at least holding at least a tiny portion of the 2nd cover segment from the medial end. If Im only holding one of the leather segments it will flip down as soon as I move it briskly.

Basically, it doesn't stick. That's what we're both saying. It has to be helped, which means it doesn't stick. I expect it to have a minor attraction when it's held vertically, and it does. But that's so weak, it won't stay if it's even moved the slightest. And it has to be bent around the edge to do even that. We're discussing something that's irrelevant, because it's so useless.

The cover seems best when used as a stand. For that, it's better than the old one, which I had to cut a bit off the edge so it would lean back a bit more when slid into the slot in the back.

I'm wondering if we'll see cases that will have the left edge cut out so that the cover can be used with them. Apple has stated that manufacturers are free to do whatever they wanted to do with the magnets in the iPad itself, so I suppose we'll see cases from others using them in some way. It should be very interesting to see what some others come up with. This offers even more possibilities than we had with the first model.

I'm going to put four clear vinyl feet, about 3/8 wide by about a 1/16 thick on the back of my iPad for now. I'm thinking about putting them slightly over the rounded portion of the back where it sits when in the typing mode, and cutting a small portion off the circle to square off that edge. This will at least keep it from touching a surface when the cover can't be rolled over the back, something that's a hazard anyway, as it may pick up small bits of sharp matter that could possibly scratch the screen.
post #159 of 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mac-sochist View Post

Thanks for the history. It actually appears that we're going backwards: It seems to be a little-known fact that Blu-Ray players displaying 1080-line material are limited to 24 fps. If your TV can't switch to that framerate, or the player and TV can't handshake on it, the output defaults to 720p at 30 fps.

I always wondered what the 120 Hz refresh rate on new TVs was all about when 60 is already overkill for the signals they're displaying. I finally realized it was to resolve this problemif the incoming signal is 30 fps, each frame will be refreshed 4 times, if it's 24 fps, 5 times. The Player doesn't have to know anything.

No, that is incorrect.

If your HDTV is not capable of 24p, then your Blu-Ray player will just give you a 2:3 telecine type pulldown for interlaced output at 1080i.

This is similar to DVD players able to do the exact OPPOSITE --- they take the interlaced signal, inverse telecine the video --- and recreate a 24p frame. No resolution changes.
post #160 of 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

Except that reviewers are saying the same thing. And, more importantly, reviewers are techno geeks. It's what they do, and love. For them, a geeky UI is great. Look at what they said about the Palm Pre and WebOS. But WebOS is terrible for everyone else. It's too complex, and isn't obvious. What I've been reading about Honeycomb seems to be similar. Once you figure it out, it's fine. But the average person buying these things doesn't want to have to figure it out. Honeycomb is much more complex than Android.

Battery life only 2 hours? No. Standby life was already clarified. Those who complained about it may be right, but others find it just fine. But if I got people opinions about the ipad from the forums of anandtech, I would think that the ipad is crap because they have a overly negative view of apple.

Sales volume or not, the Galaxy tab has 4.5/5 stars rating on Amazon. Is it better than the ipad or ipad2? No. But I doubt with that rating they have that absurd return rate.

Quote:
A financial analyst is closer to the average person as far as geekiness goes. If he finds it to be confusing, then it's more likely the average person will as well.

Did you actually read the source? Everything he said was not based on any of his own testing.

Quote:
And you're talking out of your ass as well, because I'm willing to bet dollars to donuts that you haven't used it, or you would have said so. It's too late now to pretend you have.

Since I made no claims about the Xoom one way or another, that's a strawman argument.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPad
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › Dual core SGX543 dramatically boosts iPad 2 graphics