iPad is faster than iPhone 4 is faster than iPhone 3GS.
That's great. The iPad has a faster clocker processor than the iPhone 4 has a faster clocker processor than the 3GS. What's your point?
That is only one metric of performance. People were expecting 512MB RAM back in January, for obvious reasons, and they were surprised when they didn't get it, and even more surprised when the iPhone 4 did. You don't question a device 2 month apart, where the smaller one with less resolution and less complex apps has twice as much RAM or the issue with Safari not caching web pages if they are over 26.2Kb.
That's great. The iPad has a faster clocker processor than the iPhone 4 has a faster clocker processor than the 3GS. What's your point?
That is only one metric of performance. People were expecting 512MB RAM back in January, for obvious reasons, and they were surprised when they didn't get it, and even more surprised when the iPhone 4 did. You don't question a device 2 month apart, where the smaller one with less resolution and less complex apps has twice as much RAM or the issue with Safari not caching web pages if they are over 26.2Kb.
Perhaps I wasn't clear in my post because you seem to be discussing something I'm not.
In performance tests the iPad is faster than the iPhone 4 which is faster than the iPhone 3GS. I don't care about any willy waving specs.
That's it - don't infer I meant anything about processor speed. The point I made is that it is silly to judge the device based on things such as RAM or processor speed *if* it performs better than anything else.
Too often techies and techie wannabes get into these arguments (especially on The Register if you're so inclined to enter a world where anyone not anti-Apple is considered a devil worshiper) about feeds and speeds without ever discussing the performance of the device in usage. That's my point.
Judging the device based on RAM when it is faster than other devices is just a bit silly. That's my point.
iPad is faster than iPhone 4 is faster than iPhone 3GS.?
Not always. It is true that iPhone 4 will be faster than iPhone 3GS in almost all cases (barring some kind of bug in the software that chokes on the higher clock speed).
It is NOT true that the iPad will always be faster than the iPhone 4. The iPhone 4 has twice the RAM of the iPad. If the task is clock-speed limited, the iPad will be faster. If the limitation is RAM and there is a big enough bottleneck to make up for the clock speed difference, there are tasks where the iPhone 4 is faster than the iPad. Check some of the published benchmarks.
Perhaps I wasn't clear in my post because you seem to be discussing something I'm not.
In performance tests the iPad is faster than the iPhone 4 which is faster than the iPhone 3GS. I don't care about any willy waving specs.
That's it - don't infer I meant anything about processor speed. The point I made is that it is silly to judge the device based on things such as RAM or processor speed *if* it performs better than anything else.
Too often techies and techie wannabes get into these arguments (especially on The Register if you're so inclined to enter a world where anyone not anti-Apple is considered a devil worshiper) about feeds and speeds without ever discussing the performance of the device in usage. That's my point.
Judging the device based on RAM when it is faster than other devices is just a bit silly. That's my point.
Not mentioning processor, you're convoluting your argument by saying you aren't talking about performance, but then then talking about speed (ie: faster).
The iPad performs worse for my needs than the original iPhone did, therefore, it's performance is worse than the original iPhone. That's why I returned my iPad. Whether this is a HW (due to the low RAM which only shows about 40MB let at startup while the iPhone 4 has 360MB and the 3GS 105MB) has or can be fixed in SW is another argument.
The concern people have with RAM is about performance and how this will impact the device with v4.0, but you keep mentioning speed right now, which I keep stating is only metric to measure performance. It's why some people like Macs and iPhones, they aren't the fastest on the block if you look only at HW specs but they do offer performance and usability that others can't easily match.
The iPad performs worse for my needs than the original iPhone did, therefore, it's performance is worse than the original iPhone. That's why I returned my iPad. Whether this is a HW (due to the low RAM which only shows about 40MB let at startup while the iPhone 4 has 360MB and the 3GS 105MB) has or can be fixed in SW is another argument.
I can believe that the iPad could be slower than the 3GS for some very unusual situations, but for the majority of reports, the iPad is considerably faster than the 3GS.
I can NOT, however, believe that the iPad would be slower than the original iPhone on anything. If it was, you had a defective unit.
I can believe that the iPad could be slower than the 3GS for some very unusual situations, but for the majority of reports, the iPad is considerably faster than the 3GS.
I can NOT, however, believe that the iPad would be slower than the original iPhone on anything. If it was, you had a defective unit.
Reproducible on all iPads. You're not understanding the difference between performance and usability v. speed.
That's great. The iPad has a faster clocker processor than the iPhone 4 has a faster clocker processor than the 3GS. What's your point?
That is only one metric of performance. People were expecting 512MB RAM back in January, for obvious reasons, and they were surprised when they didn't get it, and even more surprised when the iPhone 4 did. You don't question a device 2 month apart, where the smaller one with less resolution and less complex apps has twice as much RAM or the issue with Safari not caching web pages if they are over 26.2Kb.
I would suggest this reasoning, say, around last December:
-- Apple needed a lot of RAM for both new devices plus a new iPod Touch
-- They needed commit to parts to both devices
-- Apple expected a [more] modest launch of the iPad
-- Given that, Apple targeted the 512K RAM to the iPhone, with more predictable launch success
-- Apple figured that they could finesse the smaller RAM on the iPad through software
And, I do think Apple can resolve the browser caching/refresh issue-- I suspect that they planned to do this in early fall (Sept-Oct) with iOS 4 update.
Now, with all this iPhone 4 flack has caused them to reassign people and delay the iOS4 iPad update until late fall.
Finally, I believe there is a potential for a "new," breakthrough, mobile device in January that uses a lot of these same parts... If true, Apple needs to be reserving parts and production lines, NOW!
Reproducible on all iPads. You're not understanding the difference between performance and usability v. speed.
I am talking about performance and usability. While you can't look at a single specification and know which system is faster, the iPad is faster in every single way than the iPhone. In that case, you can say with a high degree of confidence that the iPad will be faster on everything (barring some badly written application on the iPad).
The original iPhone as 128 MB of RAM and something like a 300-400 MHz processor and a slow GPU.
The iPad has 256 MB of RAM, a 1 GHz processor, and a significantly faster GPU.
Just what type of task is going to be slower on the original iPhone?
Ok so explain something to me. An article comes out a month ago proclaiming Android has a higher browser usage than the iPhone in the first quarter and it is immediately interpreted to mean that Android is outselling Apple. Now we get a report that just the iPad is beating the Android OS in browser usage, but the article is quick to state that Android is not being outsold. How was it supposed to be hard data that Android was outselling the first time, but now when its reversed that is not the case? I bet if you totaled the iPod Touch, iPhone and iPad browser usage it would be huge.
I am talking about performance and usability. While you can't look at a single specification and know which system is faster, the iPad is faster in every single way than the iPhone. In that case, you can say with a high degree of confidence that the iPad will be faster on everything (barring some badly written application on the iPad).
The original iPhone as 128 MB of RAM and something like a 300-400 MHz processor and a slow GPU.
The iPad has 256 MB of RAM, a 1 GHz processor, and a significantly faster GPU.
Just what type of task is going to be slower on the original iPhone?
1) When the iPad gets iOS 4.0, it will still have a higher resolution display and more complex apps in general so how will that 256MB RAM compare to the iPhone 4 with 512MB RAM if one is doing many tasks that need more than 256MB RAM. The iPad will then perform slower than the iPhone 4 despite having a fast processor because switching apps will require then to be restarted completely instead of merely being pulled back up. THAT IS A REAL CONCERN FOR MANY WITH THE iPAD, HENCE THE CONCERN ABOUT THE 256MB RAM AND iOS 4.0, WHICH USES MORE RAM THAN iOS 3.x BEFORE ANY MULTITASKING IS ACTIVE.
2) I've explained this already. Safari on the iPad can't keep multiple pages open if they exceed 25.6KB, while the original iPhone had no limit on this can could keep 8 pages open and let you switch between them, and even leave the app without refreshing the page when you returned. This made the iPad remarkably slow and ultimately unusable for me, hence my decision to return it. This makes the iPad preform worse an be less usable than the iPad for my needs. Why is this concept so hard to understand?
Ok so explain something to me. An article comes out a month ago proclaiming Android has a higher browser usage than the iPhone in the first quarter and it is immediately interpreted to mean that Android is outselling Apple. Now we get a report that just the iPad is beating the Android OS in browser usage, but the article is quick to state that Android is not being outsold. How was it supposed to be hard data that Android was outselling the first time, but now when its reversed that is not the case?
1) When the iPad gets iOS 4.0, it will still have a higher resolution display and more complex apps in general so how will that 256MB RAM compare to the iPhone 4 with 512MB RAM if one is doing many tasks that need more than 256MB RAM. The iPad will then perform slower than the iPhone 4 despite having a fast processor because switching apps will require then to be restarted completely instead of merely being pulled back up. THAT IS A REAL CONCERN FOR MANY WITH THE iPAD, HENCE THE CONCERN ABOUT THE 256MB RAM AND iOS 4.0, WHICH USES MORE RAM THAN iOS 3.x BEFORE ANY MULTITASKING IS ACTIVE.
2) I've explained this already. Safari on the iPad can't keep multiple pages open if they exceed 25.6KB, while the original iPhone had no limit on this can could keep 8 pages open and let you switch between them, and even leave the app without refreshing the page when you returned. This made the iPad remarkably slow and ultimately unusable for me, hence my decision to return it. This makes the iPad preform worse an be less usable than the iPad for my needs. Why is this concept so hard to understand?
That's not an indication that the iPad is slower than the iPhone. It is simply, as I said, an example of a programming bug. You're asking the iPad to do 10 times as much work.
Not to mention, of course, that even with less caching, an iPad on 3G is likely to get your web pages just as fast as the original iPhone on EDGE for most users.
In any event, you have a very isolated situation that doesn't affect many people. If you reach the conclusion that the iPad is not as good for your work pattern, that's reasonable. But claiming that it's slower than the original iPhone is simply inaccurate.
That's not an indication that the iPad is slower than the iPhone. It is simply, as I said, an example of a programming bug. You're asking the iPad to do 10 times as much work.
Not to mention, of course, that even with less caching, an iPad on 3G is likely to get your web pages just as fast as the original iPhone on EDGE for most users.
In any event, you have a very isolated situation that doesn't affect many people. If you reach the conclusion that the iPad is not as good for your work pattern, that's reasonable. But claiming that it's slower than the original iPhone is simply inaccurate.
JFC! This is a clear indication that the iPad preforms worse and is less usable than the original iPhone for my needs. How could that possibly not register. It doesn't matter if UMTS is faster than EDGE if I'm using it on a 802.11g WiFi network -or- if that EDGE network isn't being used because I dont' have to wait for the 3G network to resend the page after my rigamarole of copying the page, then pasting to Notes, then copying and pasting complete info, then going back to other Safari page, waiting for it to reload (so glad I have 802.11n here) and then pasting data. Oh shit, I forget something, now I have to do all this again.
By your reckoning, Apple doesn't make any product that suits your needs because I can keep drilling down to a specific component and say "see, this is faster and cheaper in another machine so Apple is crap and overpriced." Yet, the 600MHz 3GS performed better the 1GHz Nexus One in GPU tests, but if I only look at the CPU speeds, not the actual work that can be done in a set amount of time, then there is no reason for any one to get an iPhone.
No, I'm asking it to do the SAME work as the iPhone. Yes, I've already detailed it as a bug in Safari but I've also detailed the low RAM being a concern for many with iOS 4.0 comes out.
No, I'm asking it to do the SAME work as the iPhone. Yes, I've already detailed it as a bug in Safari but I've also detailed the low RAM being a concern for many with iOS 4.0 comes out.
And THAT is what you don't get. You're NOT asking it to do the same thing. Even though you're using the 'same' application, on the iPad it's refreshing constantly while on the iPhone it keeps the page. That means the iPad is doing far more work so the comparison is flawed.
I never denied that if that's important to you that the iPhone would be a more suitable choice until the bug is fixed. But it is not an indication that the iPhone is faster. It's simply the case that you're making the iPad do much, more more work (or, if you want to be pedantic, the programmers chose a mechanism which ultimately makes the iPad do much more work).
By your logic, if I drive a VW Bug to a town 10 miles away and it takes me 10 minutes, but it takes you 4 hours to drive from New York to Boston, then the Bug must be faster, right?
And THAT is what you don't get. You're NOT asking it to do the same thing. Even though you're using the 'same' application, on the iPad it's refreshing constantly while on the iPhone it keeps the page. That means the iPad is doing far more work so the comparison is flawed.
I never denied that if that's important to you that the iPhone would be a more suitable choice until the bug is fixed. But it is not an indication that the iPhone is faster. It's simply the case that you're making the iPad do much, more more work (or, if you want to be pedantic, the programmers chose a mechanism which ultimately makes the iPad do much more work).
By your logic, if I drive a VW Bug to a town 10 miles away and it takes me 10 minutes, but it takes you 4 hours to drive from New York to Boston, then the Bug must be faster, right?
Your ability to see beyond your own needs and think rationally is astounding. And I know you aren't stupid so how or why you are limiting yourself is a mystery.
Let's take your VW example. You have 10 miles to traverse, you could do that with a jet much faster, according to your previous comments about processor speeds equaling more performance and usability, so why would it take less overall time for you to drive than it would be to take a jet? Of course not, that's silly, but the jet has a higher top speed and if you go over x-distance the jet becomes the better option, but your claim is that the jet would perform better for me in every case and be more usable. BTW, where is my jetpack they promise in the 50s.
And YES, I'm asking if to do the exact same task of keeping multiple pages open in Safari while work. Mot of my posts to AI are from my iPhone yet I can perform more tasks easier than on the iPad, despite your claim that it's simply not possible.
Wow. What happened to this thread. I personally am looking forward to iOS 4. I consider my iPad my personal R&D device. I think iOS4 will make things faster and more responsive. iOS4 on my 3GS is quite alright to me.
iPad may or may not be able to fulfil all needs especially mission critical kind of stuff where you need a Mac or PC. So far the Safari caching thing hasn't bothered me. Maybe the same thing how iPhone 4 reception didn't get the majority of users worked up...
Yeah, it's kinda' funny-- wherever I go around the house I take my iPad with me. I have a laptop. but never did that with it.
I've had lots of computers over the years, and the iPad hits set sweet spot for most things.
.
I have a third party Capdase faux leather case that more or less makes the iPad into like a personal book. Last time I slept with an Apple product (har har) it was a simple iPod mini.
My Pogo stylus is just several hours away by Fedex. Can't wait, as long as I can still do some handwritten notes or sketches, that'll be the icing on the cake.
Also last major book series I read was Dune (the original ones, not the IMO rubbish newfandangled posthumous ones). Any recommendations for a chill out bedtime read from iBookstore?
Also curious about the Popular Science app/ magazine. Any good?
Wow. What happened to this thread. I personally am looking forward to iOS 4. I consider my iPad my personal R&D device. I think iOS4 will make things faster and more responsive. iOS4 on my 3GS is quite alright to me.
iPad may or may not be able to fulfil all needs especially mission critical kind of stuff where you need a Mac or PC. So far the Safari caching thing hasn't bothered me. Maybe the same thing how iPhone 4 reception didn't get the majority of users worked up...
Crazy 10 days of Apple. Crazy.
What kind of R&D do you plan on using your iPad for?
Some kind of development or just a lot of experimenting?
Are you an iPhone developer with access to programming the devices?
The reasons I ask is that I, too, think of the iPad as much more than just a content consumer: I am a developer, and can't wait for iOS 4 to be available for the iPad.
Here are some things that have piqued my interest:
--The iPad, while it doesn't have a camera, seems made for iMove as it has enough screen real estate to do a creditable job of on-the-spot video editing. The combination of the iPad, CCC and iPhone 4 cameras are a natural for this.
-- Some of the drawing programs are very robust, approaching what is available on the desktop
-- Steve has said that he would welcome an HyperCard app on the iPad. RunRev has a HyperCard-like development tool that can develop iPad apps. It was rejected for the same reasons that Flash was rejected. I think what Steve is looking for is a HyperCard app that iPad users could to write simple, personalized apps.
-- Bill Atkinson, the originator of HyperCard has some apps in the app store
-- there have been rumors that Bare Bones is considering bringing BBEdit to the iPad
-- The next version of XCode has a major revision that brings IB inboard, and is designed to be driven by a single screen view, as opposed to the multi-window design of the current version
I have a third party Capdase faux leather case that more or less makes the iPad into like a personal book. Last time I slept with an Apple product (har har) it was a simple iPod mini.
My Pogo stylus is just several hours away by Fedex. Can't wait, as long as I can still do some handwritten notes or sketches, that'll be the icing on the cake.
Also last major book series I read was Dune (the original ones, not the IMO rubbish newfandangled posthumous ones). Any recommendations for a chill out bedtime read from iBookstore?
Also curious about the Popular Science app/ magazine. Any good?
I have been delaying buying a Pogo-- waiting for pressure sensitive. I made a serviceable homemade stylus with aluminum foil.
I haven't read any books on the iPad, yet-- but plan to. I don't really care for any of the Magazine apps. IMO, PS is the best I've seen, but still not good enough. Wired is terrible, IMO-- just 2 sets (1 landscape and 1 portrait) of pictures of magazine pages.
Comments
iPad is faster than iPhone 4 is faster than iPhone 3GS.
That's great. The iPad has a faster clocker processor than the iPhone 4 has a faster clocker processor than the 3GS. What's your point?
That is only one metric of performance. People were expecting 512MB RAM back in January, for obvious reasons, and they were surprised when they didn't get it, and even more surprised when the iPhone 4 did. You don't question a device 2 month apart, where the smaller one with less resolution and less complex apps has twice as much RAM or the issue with Safari not caching web pages if they are over 26.2Kb.
That's great. The iPad has a faster clocker processor than the iPhone 4 has a faster clocker processor than the 3GS. What's your point?
That is only one metric of performance. People were expecting 512MB RAM back in January, for obvious reasons, and they were surprised when they didn't get it, and even more surprised when the iPhone 4 did. You don't question a device 2 month apart, where the smaller one with less resolution and less complex apps has twice as much RAM or the issue with Safari not caching web pages if they are over 26.2Kb.
Perhaps I wasn't clear in my post because you seem to be discussing something I'm not.
In performance tests the iPad is faster than the iPhone 4 which is faster than the iPhone 3GS. I don't care about any willy waving specs.
That's it - don't infer I meant anything about processor speed. The point I made is that it is silly to judge the device based on things such as RAM or processor speed *if* it performs better than anything else.
Too often techies and techie wannabes get into these arguments (especially on The Register if you're so inclined to enter a world where anyone not anti-Apple is considered a devil worshiper) about feeds and speeds without ever discussing the performance of the device in usage. That's my point.
Judging the device based on RAM when it is faster than other devices is just a bit silly. That's my point.
iPad is faster than iPhone 4 is faster than iPhone 3GS.?
Not always. It is true that iPhone 4 will be faster than iPhone 3GS in almost all cases (barring some kind of bug in the software that chokes on the higher clock speed).
It is NOT true that the iPad will always be faster than the iPhone 4. The iPhone 4 has twice the RAM of the iPad. If the task is clock-speed limited, the iPad will be faster. If the limitation is RAM and there is a big enough bottleneck to make up for the clock speed difference, there are tasks where the iPhone 4 is faster than the iPad. Check some of the published benchmarks.
Perhaps I wasn't clear in my post because you seem to be discussing something I'm not.
In performance tests the iPad is faster than the iPhone 4 which is faster than the iPhone 3GS. I don't care about any willy waving specs.
That's it - don't infer I meant anything about processor speed. The point I made is that it is silly to judge the device based on things such as RAM or processor speed *if* it performs better than anything else.
Too often techies and techie wannabes get into these arguments (especially on The Register if you're so inclined to enter a world where anyone not anti-Apple is considered a devil worshiper) about feeds and speeds without ever discussing the performance of the device in usage. That's my point.
Judging the device based on RAM when it is faster than other devices is just a bit silly. That's my point.
Not mentioning processor, you're convoluting your argument by saying you aren't talking about performance, but then then talking about speed (ie: faster).
The iPad performs worse for my needs than the original iPhone did, therefore, it's performance is worse than the original iPhone. That's why I returned my iPad. Whether this is a HW (due to the low RAM which only shows about 40MB let at startup while the iPhone 4 has 360MB and the 3GS 105MB) has or can be fixed in SW is another argument.
The concern people have with RAM is about performance and how this will impact the device with v4.0, but you keep mentioning speed right now, which I keep stating is only metric to measure performance. It's why some people like Macs and iPhones, they aren't the fastest on the block if you look only at HW specs but they do offer performance and usability that others can't easily match.
The iPad performs worse for my needs than the original iPhone did, therefore, it's performance is worse than the original iPhone. That's why I returned my iPad. Whether this is a HW (due to the low RAM which only shows about 40MB let at startup while the iPhone 4 has 360MB and the 3GS 105MB) has or can be fixed in SW is another argument.
I can believe that the iPad could be slower than the 3GS for some very unusual situations, but for the majority of reports, the iPad is considerably faster than the 3GS.
I can NOT, however, believe that the iPad would be slower than the original iPhone on anything. If it was, you had a defective unit.
I can believe that the iPad could be slower than the 3GS for some very unusual situations, but for the majority of reports, the iPad is considerably faster than the 3GS.
I can NOT, however, believe that the iPad would be slower than the original iPhone on anything. If it was, you had a defective unit.
Reproducible on all iPads. You're not understanding the difference between performance and usability v. speed.
That's great. The iPad has a faster clocker processor than the iPhone 4 has a faster clocker processor than the 3GS. What's your point?
That is only one metric of performance. People were expecting 512MB RAM back in January, for obvious reasons, and they were surprised when they didn't get it, and even more surprised when the iPhone 4 did. You don't question a device 2 month apart, where the smaller one with less resolution and less complex apps has twice as much RAM or the issue with Safari not caching web pages if they are over 26.2Kb.
I would suggest this reasoning, say, around last December:
-- Apple needed a lot of RAM for both new devices plus a new iPod Touch
-- They needed commit to parts to both devices
-- Apple expected a [more] modest launch of the iPad
-- Given that, Apple targeted the 512K RAM to the iPhone, with more predictable launch success
-- Apple figured that they could finesse the smaller RAM on the iPad through software
And, I do think Apple can resolve the browser caching/refresh issue-- I suspect that they planned to do this in early fall (Sept-Oct) with iOS 4 update.
Now, with all this iPhone 4 flack has caused them to reassign people and delay the iOS4 iPad update until late fall.
Finally, I believe there is a potential for a "new," breakthrough, mobile device in January that uses a lot of these same parts... If true, Apple needs to be reserving parts and production lines, NOW!
.
Reproducible on all iPads. You're not understanding the difference between performance and usability v. speed.
I am talking about performance and usability. While you can't look at a single specification and know which system is faster, the iPad is faster in every single way than the iPhone. In that case, you can say with a high degree of confidence that the iPad will be faster on everything (barring some badly written application on the iPad).
The original iPhone as 128 MB of RAM and something like a 300-400 MHz processor and a slow GPU.
The iPad has 256 MB of RAM, a 1 GHz processor, and a significantly faster GPU.
Just what type of task is going to be slower on the original iPhone?
I am talking about performance and usability. While you can't look at a single specification and know which system is faster, the iPad is faster in every single way than the iPhone. In that case, you can say with a high degree of confidence that the iPad will be faster on everything (barring some badly written application on the iPad).
The original iPhone as 128 MB of RAM and something like a 300-400 MHz processor and a slow GPU.
The iPad has 256 MB of RAM, a 1 GHz processor, and a significantly faster GPU.
Just what type of task is going to be slower on the original iPhone?
1) When the iPad gets iOS 4.0, it will still have a higher resolution display and more complex apps in general so how will that 256MB RAM compare to the iPhone 4 with 512MB RAM if one is doing many tasks that need more than 256MB RAM. The iPad will then perform slower than the iPhone 4 despite having a fast processor because switching apps will require then to be restarted completely instead of merely being pulled back up. THAT IS A REAL CONCERN FOR MANY WITH THE iPAD, HENCE THE CONCERN ABOUT THE 256MB RAM AND iOS 4.0, WHICH USES MORE RAM THAN iOS 3.x BEFORE ANY MULTITASKING IS ACTIVE.
2) I've explained this already. Safari on the iPad can't keep multiple pages open if they exceed 25.6KB, while the original iPhone had no limit on this can could keep 8 pages open and let you switch between them, and even leave the app without refreshing the page when you returned. This made the iPad remarkably slow and ultimately unusable for me, hence my decision to return it. This makes the iPad preform worse an be less usable than the iPad for my needs. Why is this concept so hard to understand?
Ok so explain something to me. An article comes out a month ago proclaiming Android has a higher browser usage than the iPhone in the first quarter and it is immediately interpreted to mean that Android is outselling Apple. Now we get a report that just the iPad is beating the Android OS in browser usage, but the article is quick to state that Android is not being outsold. How was it supposed to be hard data that Android was outselling the first time, but now when its reversed that is not the case?
See posts 51 and 52.
1) When the iPad gets iOS 4.0, it will still have a higher resolution display and more complex apps in general so how will that 256MB RAM compare to the iPhone 4 with 512MB RAM if one is doing many tasks that need more than 256MB RAM. The iPad will then perform slower than the iPhone 4 despite having a fast processor because switching apps will require then to be restarted completely instead of merely being pulled back up. THAT IS A REAL CONCERN FOR MANY WITH THE iPAD, HENCE THE CONCERN ABOUT THE 256MB RAM AND iOS 4.0, WHICH USES MORE RAM THAN iOS 3.x BEFORE ANY MULTITASKING IS ACTIVE.
2) I've explained this already. Safari on the iPad can't keep multiple pages open if they exceed 25.6KB, while the original iPhone had no limit on this can could keep 8 pages open and let you switch between them, and even leave the app without refreshing the page when you returned. This made the iPad remarkably slow and ultimately unusable for me, hence my decision to return it. This makes the iPad preform worse an be less usable than the iPad for my needs. Why is this concept so hard to understand?
That's not an indication that the iPad is slower than the iPhone. It is simply, as I said, an example of a programming bug. You're asking the iPad to do 10 times as much work.
Not to mention, of course, that even with less caching, an iPad on 3G is likely to get your web pages just as fast as the original iPhone on EDGE for most users.
In any event, you have a very isolated situation that doesn't affect many people. If you reach the conclusion that the iPad is not as good for your work pattern, that's reasonable. But claiming that it's slower than the original iPhone is simply inaccurate.
That's not an indication that the iPad is slower than the iPhone. It is simply, as I said, an example of a programming bug. You're asking the iPad to do 10 times as much work.
Not to mention, of course, that even with less caching, an iPad on 3G is likely to get your web pages just as fast as the original iPhone on EDGE for most users.
In any event, you have a very isolated situation that doesn't affect many people. If you reach the conclusion that the iPad is not as good for your work pattern, that's reasonable. But claiming that it's slower than the original iPhone is simply inaccurate.
JFC! This is a clear indication that the iPad preforms worse and is less usable than the original iPhone for my needs. How could that possibly not register. It doesn't matter if UMTS is faster than EDGE if I'm using it on a 802.11g WiFi network -or- if that EDGE network isn't being used because I dont' have to wait for the 3G network to resend the page after my rigamarole of copying the page, then pasting to Notes, then copying and pasting complete info, then going back to other Safari page, waiting for it to reload (so glad I have 802.11n here) and then pasting data. Oh shit, I forget something, now I have to do all this again.
By your reckoning, Apple doesn't make any product that suits your needs because I can keep drilling down to a specific component and say "see, this is faster and cheaper in another machine so Apple is crap and overpriced." Yet, the 600MHz 3GS performed better the 1GHz Nexus One in GPU tests, but if I only look at the CPU speeds, not the actual work that can be done in a set amount of time, then there is no reason for any one to get an iPhone.
No, I'm asking it to do the SAME work as the iPhone. Yes, I've already detailed it as a bug in Safari but I've also detailed the low RAM being a concern for many with iOS 4.0 comes out.
No, I'm asking it to do the SAME work as the iPhone. Yes, I've already detailed it as a bug in Safari but I've also detailed the low RAM being a concern for many with iOS 4.0 comes out.
And THAT is what you don't get. You're NOT asking it to do the same thing. Even though you're using the 'same' application, on the iPad it's refreshing constantly while on the iPhone it keeps the page. That means the iPad is doing far more work so the comparison is flawed.
I never denied that if that's important to you that the iPhone would be a more suitable choice until the bug is fixed. But it is not an indication that the iPhone is faster. It's simply the case that you're making the iPad do much, more more work (or, if you want to be pedantic, the programmers chose a mechanism which ultimately makes the iPad do much more work).
By your logic, if I drive a VW Bug to a town 10 miles away and it takes me 10 minutes, but it takes you 4 hours to drive from New York to Boston, then the Bug must be faster, right?
And THAT is what you don't get. You're NOT asking it to do the same thing. Even though you're using the 'same' application, on the iPad it's refreshing constantly while on the iPhone it keeps the page. That means the iPad is doing far more work so the comparison is flawed.
I never denied that if that's important to you that the iPhone would be a more suitable choice until the bug is fixed. But it is not an indication that the iPhone is faster. It's simply the case that you're making the iPad do much, more more work (or, if you want to be pedantic, the programmers chose a mechanism which ultimately makes the iPad do much more work).
By your logic, if I drive a VW Bug to a town 10 miles away and it takes me 10 minutes, but it takes you 4 hours to drive from New York to Boston, then the Bug must be faster, right?
Your ability to see beyond your own needs and think rationally is astounding. And I know you aren't stupid so how or why you are limiting yourself is a mystery.
Let's take your VW example. You have 10 miles to traverse, you could do that with a jet much faster, according to your previous comments about processor speeds equaling more performance and usability, so why would it take less overall time for you to drive than it would be to take a jet? Of course not, that's silly, but the jet has a higher top speed and if you go over x-distance the jet becomes the better option, but your claim is that the jet would perform better for me in every case and be more usable. BTW, where is my jetpack they promise in the 50s.
And YES, I'm asking if to do the exact same task of keeping multiple pages open in Safari while work. Mot of my posts to AI are from my iPhone yet I can perform more tasks easier than on the iPad, despite your claim that it's simply not possible.
iPad may or may not be able to fulfil all needs especially mission critical kind of stuff where you need a Mac or PC. So far the Safari caching thing hasn't bothered me. Maybe the same thing how iPhone 4 reception didn't get the majority of users worked up...
Crazy 10 days of Apple. Crazy.
Yeah, it's kinda' funny-- wherever I go around the house I take my iPad with me. I have a laptop. but never did that with it.
I've had lots of computers over the years, and the iPad hits set sweet spot for most things.
.
I have a third party Capdase faux leather case that more or less makes the iPad into like a personal book. Last time I slept with an Apple product (har har) it was a simple iPod mini.
My Pogo stylus is just several hours away by Fedex. Can't wait, as long as I can still do some handwritten notes or sketches, that'll be the icing on the cake.
Also last major book series I read was Dune (the original ones, not the IMO rubbish newfandangled posthumous ones). Any recommendations for a chill out bedtime read from iBookstore?
Also curious about the Popular Science app/ magazine. Any good?
Wow. What happened to this thread. I personally am looking forward to iOS 4. I consider my iPad my personal R&D device. I think iOS4 will make things faster and more responsive. iOS4 on my 3GS is quite alright to me.
iPad may or may not be able to fulfil all needs especially mission critical kind of stuff where you need a Mac or PC. So far the Safari caching thing hasn't bothered me. Maybe the same thing how iPhone 4 reception didn't get the majority of users worked up...
Crazy 10 days of Apple. Crazy.
What kind of R&D do you plan on using your iPad for?
Some kind of development or just a lot of experimenting?
Are you an iPhone developer with access to programming the devices?
The reasons I ask is that I, too, think of the iPad as much more than just a content consumer: I am a developer, and can't wait for iOS 4 to be available for the iPad.
Here are some things that have piqued my interest:
--The iPad, while it doesn't have a camera, seems made for iMove as it has enough screen real estate to do a creditable job of on-the-spot video editing. The combination of the iPad, CCC and iPhone 4 cameras are a natural for this.
-- Some of the drawing programs are very robust, approaching what is available on the desktop
-- Steve has said that he would welcome an HyperCard app on the iPad. RunRev has a HyperCard-like development tool that can develop iPad apps. It was rejected for the same reasons that Flash was rejected. I think what Steve is looking for is a HyperCard app that iPad users could to write simple, personalized apps.
-- Bill Atkinson, the originator of HyperCard has some apps in the app store
-- there have been rumors that Bare Bones is considering bringing BBEdit to the iPad
-- The next version of XCode has a major revision that brings IB inboard, and is designed to be driven by a single screen view, as opposed to the multi-window design of the current version
.
I have a third party Capdase faux leather case that more or less makes the iPad into like a personal book. Last time I slept with an Apple product (har har) it was a simple iPod mini.
My Pogo stylus is just several hours away by Fedex. Can't wait, as long as I can still do some handwritten notes or sketches, that'll be the icing on the cake.
Also last major book series I read was Dune (the original ones, not the IMO rubbish newfandangled posthumous ones). Any recommendations for a chill out bedtime read from iBookstore?
Also curious about the Popular Science app/ magazine. Any good?
Are you aware of this?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OgTcyjzXfTg
I have been delaying buying a Pogo-- waiting for pressure sensitive. I made a serviceable homemade stylus with aluminum foil.
I haven't read any books on the iPad, yet-- but plan to. I don't really care for any of the Magazine apps. IMO, PS is the best I've seen, but still not good enough. Wired is terrible, IMO-- just 2 sets (1 landscape and 1 portrait) of pictures of magazine pages.
.