In-depth Review: Apple's iPad 2 running iOS 4.3 - Page 6

You would think it would be newsyou would think that exposing these paid FUDsters would cause them to draw in their horns a little bit.

Well, if you think that, you don't know the Apple-centric forum universe! Unfortunately, paid Microsoft and Adobe and now Android shills are a dime a dozen on these forums and have been for years.

Calling them on it doesn't do any good either. They just shake their heads and go "Wow! Just, Wow! I knew Apple had a cult of brainwashed sheep following them, but your fanboyism has really rotted your brain if you think I'm a paid shill! That's itI'm done with this insane asylum! Goodbye!"

Then of course, they're back the next day under another name. They get paid by the post, I guess...maybe a bonus for how many replies they get? If we didn't quote their crap when we reply to them, maybe we could reduce their payout?

Well done, sir.

For a starter, one should definitely read this review alongside Paul Thurrot's of Windows Super Site (http://www.winsupersite.com/article/...le-iPad-2.aspx). It's a different evaluation of just about every single feature (like: "For the first time didn't even lower the price" (quote not literal) vs. "All of this was done at the same price points"). Something in the middle of both reviews might be closest to what the iPad 2 really deserves.

Other than that, the article leaves open a few technical issues , in particular in the benchmark area:

• It quotes Apple to say that the A5 runs at 1 GHz, but Geekbench reports 850 MHz only. Even considering power-saving features such as variable clock speed, the CPU should run at full speed in the benchmark.
• The iPhone 4 is quoted for reference, both in its AT&A and its Verizon incarnation, but there is no explanation whatsoever why the Verizon iPhone is some 30% slower although it should perform absolutely identical. Of course this is no iPhone review, but without explanation the figures raise some doubts about Geekbench.

On the other hand, the review wastes several lines on measured clockspeed differences which are clearly within the margins of tolerance (less than 0.5% deviation).

I read that review and disagree with most of what he finds to be negatives. He states that the lighter weight is not a big deal. Going from 1.6 lbs to 1.3 lbs is indeed significant. That's about 15% lighter. If a 100 lb person lost 15% of their weight, they'd only weigh 85 lbs. And in a tablet, 15% lighter makes a difference. 33% thinner is also a big deal. That makes those other tablets look fat and disgustingly obese in comparison.

The review states There is absolutely no way I can rate this thing five stars with this terrible screen.

Terrible screen? Is he on crack? The iPad screen is the best screen of any tablet out there. He does not mention that. It is IPS and looks far better than anything else. Is it great for use in direct sunlight? No, but neither is the screen on any other LCD tablet. As a matter of fact they look even worse outdoors when compared to the superior iPad screen.

And he's complaining about there being too many versions (18) available? Would it have been better with less choice? That's not a minus, that's a positive. It gives people more options to choose between. Some people like white, some people like black. Some people like verizon, some people like at&t and other people like wifi only. And you get three different memory sizes to choose between also.

A tablet like the Xoom only has two different options right now. 32 GB verizon and 32 GB wifi.
What if somebody wants a 16 GB or 64 GB? They're out of luck.
What if somebody wants to use it overseas? They're out of luck.
What if somebody wants to use AT&T instead of Verizon? They're out of luck.

More options is always better. That is not a valid point. And only a retard would get confused by having too many options. It's not hard to pick a color, choose a capacity and choose a carrier, and that's it! You're done! Other than that, I agree with the final conclusion that the iPad is highly recommended to new buyers.

Paul Thurrot is an idiot - always has been and apparently always will be. I can't remember a single story about anything related to Apple that was truthful and not grossly misleading. But, then, what would you expect from someone who makes his living by pushing Microsoft products?

Could it not be very simple.

Apple re-designs a VERY popular electronic device (iPad - iPad2.)

They want to get it to market as soon as possible to curb potential competition.

They don't want to stockpile too much because stock piling inventory results in leaked specs, reduced buzz, and most importantly 1 month of losing sales to competitors, as well as competitors getting a jump on the design.

They don't want to increase production capital for a "spike" in initial demand which will level off.

So, Apple tries to do the very difficult balancing act of balancing initial demand, required temporary spike in production and pushing back the release date to stock up inventory (which means people will have to wait anyway.)

The only solution that could get the device in the hands of everyone when they wanted it was to open additional production facilities and then shut them down after the initial spike in the crazed 'got to have it on day 1' demand. Not a smart idea.

So maybe Apple was off by a week and should have stock-piled for an additional week, but this conspiracy theory stuff is unnecessary to an obvious problem.


How does a company provide a huge amount of inventory on the launch week of a popular product without delaying the product too long, leaking the specs, and not over committing production facilities when the initial spike is reduced?

Not a easy problem to solve..... So give me a break with the Apple is doing it for PR purposes. It may be a component of consideration, like every other variable.

OK, so I finally have a chance to post my rant. I am so sick of AI's "reviews." They are terrible. So consider this my review of AI's review!

First, the reviews are exceptionally wordy. It's just not necessary. They go on an on and on for page upon page. People that read AI aren't looking for a novel. Secondly, I hate to break this to you, but "Dear Elan Dilger: You're not reviewing the concept of a tablet computer or the iPad line in general. Nor are you reviewing the evolution of the iPad. You're specifically reviewing the iPad 2." This is one reason the review is so ridiculously long...and boring. This misconception you apparently hold is demonstrated by these quotes:


I mean honestly, you sound like you work at Best Buy or perhaps Wal-Mart. Your reader already knows these "limitations." But these limitations are not specific to the iPad 2. They are limitations of all smartphones, many tablets and of course, all iPads. More wasted space.
But it's still not over:


....eh, sorry...I took a nap. I'm awake now...let's get on to some more problems:


The market in general? Now we're talking about Apple vs. PCs? I thought this was a review of the iPad 2? Speaking of which, the aforementioned nonsense takes up the entire first page. There's almost no "review" of the product until one third of the way through. That's ridiculous. And while there are some screen shots and one video, where are the demo videos of graphics capabilities. Where is the side by side comparison between the Xoom and/or Galaxy?

I'm not done yet. Now let's come to the "pros and cons":

Pros:
Strong, clean, attractive design now thinner and lighter
Natural touch interface is simple and elegant to use-------------------------Great, so are all Apple products. So was the first iPad.
More than 65,000 iPad apps and games now available----------------------Same for other products.
Makes a great mobile tool that works with your computer------------------No, really? You act as if we're never heard of a tablet or iPad before.
Fast 802.11n wireless networking, 3G data options, exceptional battery life
Reasonably priced hardware and 3G service with no contracts------------------Subjective statement re: cost
Supports FaceTime video conferencing--------------------------------------------So does the iPhone 4.

Cons:
A few minor bugs in iOS 4.3 need to get addressed-------------------This is not a problem with the iPad 2!
iOS' simplified interface means a variety of desktop features are not available--------------You've said that 8x. We know it. Everyone who isn't over 70 knows it.
Cameras are largely limited to webcam uses, not good for taking photos -------------------No one's going to take photos with it. That's why they have either an iPhone or a digital camera, or bother. Either slam the cameras or don't. I vote for crush Apple on the cameras.



Anyway, another boring, off-point word-fest from AI.

Really, it was THAT long for you? Yeesh.

You know, for a review on a site like AI, yeah it was. I read quite a bit...particularly news nad non-fiction. I often don't have the time or desire to go through 3 pages of this nonsense, where the first page has nothing to do with the review.

By the way, I'll tell you where to put the condescension in your tone....

API was recently released, Its coming......

Boxee's iPad Airplay App

FlickrStacker Brings Airplay support

Pioneer receiver to gain AirPlay support

There is an Airplay API for websites to stream content through Safari.

"At Vimeo we have a new feature in our HTML5 player thanks to our friends at Apple: you can now watch Vimeo videos on your AppleTV! Just play any video on your iPad or iPhone running iOS 4.3 and tap on the AirPlay button to send the video to your AppleTV."

It was unfortunately hyperbolic, but his complaint wasn't about the substrate technology, it was about the surface. There is a way to address that, but the problem is, fingerprint oils make it seem worse because it messes with the index of refraction of the surface.

IPS makes a bigger difference in viewing angle, I don't know if that really makes that big of a difference vs TN with bright surroundings.

Yes, you're right that the IPS screen makes a big difference in viewing angle. I don't know if it's because of the IPS technology, but the iPad screen is also brighter, has a higher contrast and better colors than the other cheap TN panels which are used in the other tablets. They look washed out in comparison to the iPad. I saw a few videos on youtube comparing the iPad screen VS Xoom screen side by side, and there is a noticeable difference in quality, even when viewed head on, let alone from an angle.

.

Hey Dudes ad Dudas,

We just got 2 iPad 2s...

While the SmartCover is nice, it doesn't provide the protection that we have with Apple Cases for the iPad 1...

We've dropped the iPad 1s several times without incident -- the unattractive seam, around the edge of the Apple Case, provides an excellent cushion for falls.

What would you recommend for a 15-year-old girl (other than a Convent) and a harried mother of 3 teenagers (other than an asylum)?

Any suggestions will be appreciated!

TIA,

Dick

.

Seriously, do you read every word of every article you endeavor to partake? You know, you are allowed to skip parts that you find tedious.

Just got my iPad 2. It is very noticeably more responsive than the original iPad which I'd used for only 2 months.

I've been using the iPhone 4 since launch. It was immediately apparent to me when it got the original iPad that apps have to reload very often as I flip between apps; I could never keep more than 2 or 3 "tabs" open in Safari without them reloading each time I switch between tabs. Forget it if I open the app store, everything will need to be reloaded after. No more lag on the iPad 2. I don't know if it's iOS 4.3 or the 512MB of RAM, probably both but more to do with the RAM I imagine.

My torture test was, with IMovie opened, open 9 tabs in Safari. Even after switching into and out of IMovie, all the tabs remained in memory!

I'm an Apple fan just as much as the average consumer I think... and I understand that this is an Apple-centric site... But the author's seem to be a bit out of touch. I love my iPod, but the new Android tablets look increasingly attractive... particularly the Xoom.

Having the same OS as the iPod is not a 'plus' for a device being compared to computers. Even IF the ipad could sync & receive updates without the use of a PC, it still couldn't be used to replace one. It's fun in the same way my ipod Touch was fun when i first got it... but it really does have aa lot of limitations when used for more than those ipod-like features. If you only need access to email and a web browser on your PC, then the ipad will do just fine... but even then, it seems that android is doing it better now.

I played w/ my brother's Xoom for about half a dday, and they're really doing some things Apple could learn from. The ease of multitasking and notifications alone were enough to sell me. Internet browsing was also a noticeably better experience for me... both because of the tabbed browser and finally being able to watch embedded Flash content! I know a lot of you more hardcore apple fans act like flash doesn't matter.... it does.

The thing is, Android isn't doing anything that hasn't been done already on pc's. I'm just ashamed that Apple didn't think to make the ipad more of a handheld computer first! Mac OS in a tablet form factor would have been awesome! And thats exactly what I felt like I was using with the Xoom... call them copiers or whatever, but I'll be buying one next week. Here's hoping that apple really steps it up for ipad 3. They need to deviate from their phone OS for the tablet form factor.

Nah, my bro's screen on his Xoom looks much more brilliant than my ipad! I do think colors look warmer on the ipad though. I'm not sure if the gpu on the ipad 2 also results in a better looking display since the resolution is the same???But at the very least, the quality of the Xoom's display is better than the original ipad... it's almost the 1st thing to grab you really.

Thing is data transfer is heavy on the battery, it's really a much safer idea to have your device plugged in while it's doing this. Every notice the warning you get when updating an unplugged laptop?
If by chance you were to neglect that warning and the computer ran out of power, we're talking pretty bad data corruption.

I'm a web developer and flash is just a royal pain in the ash. It's not quite for artists and not quite for programmers, it's buggy, slow, a security risk and isn't useable without a mouse anyway.

Most flash apps would need to be redesigned to be 'touch' friendly, so Apple made the only sane choice imho.

I bought a new one last month and returned it and got the version 2!
It is amazing the difference! like the difference of iphone and iphone 4.