I think the blog source is making a mountain out of a ant hill.
No where on that site does it say that the Asus is 10.6", that is the size of the Surface RT, (which would be 48.05 square inches vs 45.16 square inches for the iPad). And I don't see anywhere where it says they claim it has a "bigger" screen. It's possible they updated it after finding the error, but no one made a screen shot of it, so...I don't know what to think here other than Daniel copied a bloggers info without actually checking on it himself.
The disclaimer at the bottom says the images are not to scale. If there was text saying "actual size for comparison", then you guys would have something to gripe about. The Asus, Dell, and Surface were all cropped to the same size according to their bezel's outer perimeter. So a little bit of intelligence and common sense tells you it isn't to scale when one of them has a 10.6" screen and the other two have a 10.1" screen. The HP ENVY x2 is 11.6" (57.53 square inches), and displayed the smallest out of all of them. Shouldn't HP be the one who's pissed here by this logic?
You guys really need to get out if you get your panties all bunched up over an ad that passes all legal guidelines.
you and the 'butt hurt' guy need to go party somewhere together and leave the rest of us to our fun...
KDarling, that is more than likely the easiest way to explain it. Working in the graphics and advertising field, I've seen plenty of things slapped together in such a manner, without anyone ever second guessing it. It was just a picture cropped and placed. In this case, if all of them had to be of accurate scale, then everything would have been tiny next to the HP, and graphically would have looked weird on the page. I work more on the engineering 3D side of things, but have seen plenty of graphic artist coworkers with no care in the world for specs and reality.
And if they did have the word "bigger" in it before and removed it, that's all perspective. Bigger in length, but not width, nor in a squared measurement. But it would display a HD movie larger. Ads are ads, and will use one advantage to tell how it is better in some way. Just like people do with their resumes. They might have used a piece of software once, so it goes on the resume that they have some experience with it.
Wow. Rationalize much?
Speaking of truth in advertising, I think you should have named your account "badtroll" instead… I mean c'mon.
> the ASUS VivoTab Smart "has a bigger touchscreen,"
The keyword here is 'touchscreen', which includes the bezel.
In inches Microsoft is wrong:
iPad 7.31 * 9.5 = 69.46 vs VivoTab 6.7 * 10.3 = 69.01 (Staples.com)
But in millimeters Microsoft is correct:
iPad 185.7 * 241.2 = 44,790.8 vs VivoTab 171 * 262.5 = 44,887.5
Measurements are from manufacturer's website.
That wouldn't even make sense. They are both units of measure for length. They obviously rounded up for the other thing when converting to mm. The iPad: 185.67x241.3, the other thing: 170.18x261.62.
I'm staggered at the amount of fake user accounts this site has, and nobody does anything. Accounts with more than six years with the first post this week, this troll right here... The f*ck tallest?
Quote:
Originally Posted by jungmark
C'mon. TS doesn't have time to block all the trolls. If he did, he wouldn't have time to parse and multi quote! I'm kidding. Don't ban me!
Nice 1st post. Love people who register on Apple sites just to post comments like these. Justifying/defending something like this just to find an excuse to bash Apple because of a previous incident, (which is different in so many ways, because what was being compared were software elements) because of how much you despise the company. Apparently nothing was worth registering for until this very moment, to make this very comment. I'm sure we'll see a bright future of trolling from you.
Those first time posters are almost as bad as the hypocrites who would give apple a free pass for doing the same thing.
"One detail Microsoft doesn't mention: the current iPad has sported a Retina Display with a resolution of 2048 by 1536 for years now, while the new Asus Windows tablet has an "HD" resolution of just 1366 x768, more comparable to the original iPad from three years ago"
that is also misleading... you do not get 2048X1536 real estate on an ipad... you do get the full work environment of 1366X768 using windows 8
you cant do a direct resolution comparison - the OS is using the resolution in different ways.
What the heck are you talking about?
Every single of the 2048x1536 pixel on the iPad screen is addressable, it is real screen estate.
But it's a portable touch device, buttons and UI widgets have to be big enough to be usable with fingers, and text has to be big enough to be readable since it's a small screen (compared to a 17-24" desktop computer screen). It would be pretty stupid for developers to treat it like a 17" display and make UI widgets that are 20 pixels high.
Of course Windows 8's desktop mode on tablets can provide more "real-estate" by making everything too small to be used with touch and making text hard to read.
You'll say that the desktop mode is not meant to be used with touch? This doesn't make the low-resolution of Windows 8 tablets any better. If anything it's making things worse for all the minuscule text which would benefit from a high DPI display.
Too bad Windows 8's desktop mode have a lot of problems with running programs in "HiDPI" mode, which is probably why we don't see retina caliber non-RT Windows 8 tablets.
> the ASUS VivoTab Smart "has a bigger touchscreen,"
The keyword here is 'touchscreen', which includes the bezel.
In inches Microsoft is wrong:
iPad 7.31 * 9.5 = 69.46 vs VivoTab 6.7 * 10.3 = 69.01 (Staples.com)
But in millimeters Microsoft is correct:
iPad 185.7 * 241.2 = 44,790.8 vs VivoTab 171 * 262.5 = 44,887.5
Measurements are from manufacturer's website.
First, why in the world would you include the bezel in touch screen size?
Second, if one is larger than the other, it must be larger whether you use inches, millimeters, or parsecs.
"One detail Microsoft doesn't mention: the current iPad has sported a Retina Display with a resolution of 2048 by 1536 for years now, while the new Asus Windows tablet has an "HD" resolution of just 1366 x768, more comparable to the original iPad from three years ago"
that is also misleading... you do not get 2048X1536 real estate on an ipad... you do get the full work environment of 1366X768 using windows 8
you cant do a direct resolution comparison - the OS is using the resolution in different ways.
Utter nonsense. I suppose you would say we should never have moved past VGA. Or, do you think all those extra pixels on the iPad are just part of a border? I'm struggling to imagine what logic could possibly lead you to this conclusion.
This isn't as bad as Apple photoshopping the heck out of Samsung phones to make them appear almost identical to iPhones for their lawsuits.
Shut up and go away.
Originally Posted by pedromartins
I'm staggered at the amount of fake user accounts this site has, and nobody does anything. Accounts with more than six years with the first post this week, this troll right here... The f*ck tallest?
In total agreement. Fortunately, that shouldn't be the case much longer.
Originally Posted by Badbullet
I think the blog source is making a mountain out of a ant hill.
It's false advertising. This is fine to you? So I can sell a cure for cancer that doesn't actually cure cancer and not be punished?
The disclaimer at the bottom says the images are not to scale.
Every single of the 2048x1536 pixel on the iPad screen is addressable, it is real screen estate.
Where the **** do those people come from? If not for internet forums I wouldn't believe such people exist outside of gated facilities with padded rooms.
This isn't as bad as Apple photoshopping the heck out of Samsung phones to make them appear almost identical to iPhones for their lawsuits.
@ireland, the ad is comparing 64gb models to each other. If you want to go with the Mini, it's $529.
What total BS. Apple obviously didn't need to photoshop Samsung phones to make them look like iPhones - Samsung did that all by themselves! I suppose you think that Apple also secretly created and planted the internal Samsung documents produced at trial that clearly showed that they carefully, methodically and purposefully copied almost every single design and software feature they could to produce their first iPhone clone? And did so in just a matter of weeks, IP be damned?
I think the blog source is making a mountain out of a ant hill.
No where on that site does it say that the Asus is 10.6", that is the size of the Surface RT, (which would be 48.05 square inches vs 45.16 square inches for the iPad). And I don't see anywhere where it says they claim it has a "bigger" screen. It's possible they updated it after finding the error, but no one made a screen shot of it, so...I don't know what to think here other than Daniel copied a bloggers info without actually checking on it himself.
The disclaimer at the bottom says the images are not to scale. If there was text saying "actual size for comparison", then you guys would have something to gripe about. The Asus, Dell, and Surface were all cropped to the same size according to their bezel's outer perimeter. So a little bit of intelligence and common sense tells you it isn't to scale when one of them has a 10.6" screen and the other two have a 10.1" screen. The HP ENVY x2 is 11.6" (57.53 square inches), and displayed the smallest out of all of them. Shouldn't HP be the one who's pissed here by this logic?
You guys really need to get out if you get your panties all bunched up over an ad that passes all legal guidelines.
Wow! Ignorance must be bliss! Since when, when you say mine is 10.1 and yours is only 9.7, with no footnote indicated, not a size comparison? The heading clearly says "display size" and clearly gives a number that is bigger. It does not take a genius to figure out how purposefully misleading this is when in fact the "display size" is significantly SMALLER. This has nothing to do with the footnote at the bottom that says images are not to scale. And by the way, why would you not give them to scale when your heading is "compare tablets" and you've indicated that size is one of the criteria?
The Asus tablet at 10.1 and a true resolution of 1366 x 768 is 33% greater than the 1024 x 768 that content is rendered then upscaled to retina resolution.
Load a webpage on each device side by side Machead and notice the Windows Asus tablet is displaying 33% more of the page.
God you people have got to be the stupidest userbase in all of computing including the original article author and this moron parroting it.
Interesting, Microsoft states that iPads can only print to AirPrint printers, wrong I use Netgear genie to print to any printer on my network.
There are Apps for that.
You might be interested in reading how Airprint was first enabled by default on all shared printers connected to a Mac and then mysteriously removed by Apple in an apparent deal with HP.
Microsoft is telling the truth and you do get 33% more "screen real-estate" with the Asus Windows 8 device.
This is because the iPad actually renders at 1024 x 768 then simple upscales the image./
If you Macheads don't believe me then place your beloved iPad next to any Win8 tablet and load the same webpage and compare.
BTW I tried to post first but because I use Noscript, Ghostery and ABP my post didn't work. Then I disabled my content filtering et al and guess what...
This site has over 35 tracker java scripts in this page alone.
It's the most retarded use of redundant tracking services I've ever seen.
It seems not only are the general apple user base ignorant of technical details but also the author of the original article and this shit article and website PAID by Apple to report such things.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by Badbullet
I think the blog source is making a mountain out of a ant hill.
No where on that site does it say that the Asus is 10.6", that is the size of the Surface RT, (which would be 48.05 square inches vs 45.16 square inches for the iPad). And I don't see anywhere where it says they claim it has a "bigger" screen. It's possible they updated it after finding the error, but no one made a screen shot of it, so...I don't know what to think here other than Daniel copied a bloggers info without actually checking on it himself.
The disclaimer at the bottom says the images are not to scale. If there was text saying "actual size for comparison", then you guys would have something to gripe about. The Asus, Dell, and Surface were all cropped to the same size according to their bezel's outer perimeter. So a little bit of intelligence and common sense tells you it isn't to scale when one of them has a 10.6" screen and the other two have a 10.1" screen. The HP ENVY x2 is 11.6" (57.53 square inches), and displayed the smallest out of all of them. Shouldn't HP be the one who's pissed here by this logic?
You guys really need to get out if you get your panties all bunched up over an ad that passes all legal guidelines.
you and the 'butt hurt' guy need to go party somewhere together and leave the rest of us to our fun...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Badbullet
KDarling, that is more than likely the easiest way to explain it. Working in the graphics and advertising field, I've seen plenty of things slapped together in such a manner, without anyone ever second guessing it. It was just a picture cropped and placed. In this case, if all of them had to be of accurate scale, then everything would have been tiny next to the HP, and graphically would have looked weird on the page. I work more on the engineering 3D side of things, but have seen plenty of graphic artist coworkers with no care in the world for specs and reality.
And if they did have the word "bigger" in it before and removed it, that's all perspective. Bigger in length, but not width, nor in a squared measurement. But it would display a HD movie larger. Ads are ads, and will use one advantage to tell how it is better in some way. Just like people do with their resumes. They might have used a piece of software once, so it goes on the resume that they have some experience with it.
Wow. Rationalize much?
Speaking of truth in advertising, I think you should have named your account "badtroll" instead… I mean c'mon.
That wouldn't even make sense. They are both units of measure for length. They obviously rounded up for the other thing when converting to mm. The iPad: 185.67x241.3, the other thing: 170.18x261.62.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pedromartins
I'm staggered at the amount of fake user accounts this site has, and nobody does anything. Accounts with more than six years with the first post this week, this troll right here... The f*ck tallest?
Quote:
Originally Posted by jungmark
C'mon. TS doesn't have time to block all the trolls. If he did, he wouldn't have time to parse and multi quote! I'm kidding. Don't ban me!
Not Mod anymore.
3. MS says that iPad will only do one thing at a time. Clearly false.
It won't be long before Apple's lawyers go after them.
Those first time posters are almost as bad as the hypocrites who would give apple a free pass for doing the same thing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by agramonte
"One detail Microsoft doesn't mention: the current iPad has sported a Retina Display with a resolution of 2048 by 1536 for years now, while the new Asus Windows tablet has an "HD" resolution of just 1366 x768, more comparable to the original iPad from three years ago"
that is also misleading... you do not get 2048X1536 real estate on an ipad... you do get the full work environment of 1366X768 using windows 8
you cant do a direct resolution comparison - the OS is using the resolution in different ways.
What the heck are you talking about?
Every single of the 2048x1536 pixel on the iPad screen is addressable, it is real screen estate.
But it's a portable touch device, buttons and UI widgets have to be big enough to be usable with fingers, and text has to be big enough to be readable since it's a small screen (compared to a 17-24" desktop computer screen). It would be pretty stupid for developers to treat it like a 17" display and make UI widgets that are 20 pixels high.
Of course Windows 8's desktop mode on tablets can provide more "real-estate" by making everything too small to be used with touch and making text hard to read.
You'll say that the desktop mode is not meant to be used with touch? This doesn't make the low-resolution of Windows 8 tablets any better. If anything it's making things worse for all the minuscule text which would benefit from a high DPI display.
Too bad Windows 8's desktop mode have a lot of problems with running programs in "HiDPI" mode, which is probably why we don't see retina caliber non-RT Windows 8 tablets.
First, why in the world would you include the bezel in touch screen size?
Second, if one is larger than the other, it must be larger whether you use inches, millimeters, or parsecs.
Utter nonsense. I suppose you would say we should never have moved past VGA. Or, do you think all those extra pixels on the iPad are just part of a border? I'm struggling to imagine what logic could possibly lead you to this conclusion.
Originally Posted by Phrosty23
This isn't as bad as Apple photoshopping the heck out of Samsung phones to make them appear almost identical to iPhones for their lawsuits.
Shut up and go away.
Originally Posted by pedromartins
I'm staggered at the amount of fake user accounts this site has, and nobody does anything. Accounts with more than six years with the first post this week, this troll right here... The f*ck tallest?
In total agreement. Fortunately, that shouldn't be the case much longer.
Originally Posted by Badbullet
I think the blog source is making a mountain out of a ant hill.
It's false advertising. This is fine to you? So I can sell a cure for cancer that doesn't actually cure cancer and not be punished?
The disclaimer at the bottom says the images are not to scale.
That isn't acceptable.
Where the **** do those people come from? If not for internet forums I wouldn't believe such people exist outside of gated facilities with padded rooms.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
3. MS says that iPad will only do one thing at a time. Clearly false.
The ad was clearly talking about viewing multiple apps on the same screen. (They showed Outlook being used at the same time as viewing a video.)
Quote:
It won't be long before Apple's lawyers go after them.
You really think that'll happen?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phrosty23
This isn't as bad as Apple photoshopping the heck out of Samsung phones to make them appear almost identical to iPhones for their lawsuits.
@ireland, the ad is comparing 64gb models to each other. If you want to go with the Mini, it's $529.
What total BS. Apple obviously didn't need to photoshop Samsung phones to make them look like iPhones - Samsung did that all by themselves! I suppose you think that Apple also secretly created and planted the internal Samsung documents produced at trial that clearly showed that they carefully, methodically and purposefully copied almost every single design and software feature they could to produce their first iPhone clone? And did so in just a matter of weeks, IP be damned?
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone
I took the time to draw it up in Illustrator by the numbers and this it what it looks like. Not so far off but enough to make you wonder.
And BTW I did go to Microsoft's web page first to make sure what they were presenting.
http://windows.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-8/compare#t1=asus-vivotab-smart
Interesting, Microsoft states that iPads can only print to AirPrint printers, wrong I use Netgear genie to print to any printer on my network.
There are Apps for that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Badbullet
I think the blog source is making a mountain out of a ant hill.
No where on that site does it say that the Asus is 10.6", that is the size of the Surface RT, (which would be 48.05 square inches vs 45.16 square inches for the iPad). And I don't see anywhere where it says they claim it has a "bigger" screen. It's possible they updated it after finding the error, but no one made a screen shot of it, so...I don't know what to think here other than Daniel copied a bloggers info without actually checking on it himself.
The disclaimer at the bottom says the images are not to scale. If there was text saying "actual size for comparison", then you guys would have something to gripe about. The Asus, Dell, and Surface were all cropped to the same size according to their bezel's outer perimeter. So a little bit of intelligence and common sense tells you it isn't to scale when one of them has a 10.6" screen and the other two have a 10.1" screen. The HP ENVY x2 is 11.6" (57.53 square inches), and displayed the smallest out of all of them. Shouldn't HP be the one who's pissed here by this logic?
You guys really need to get out if you get your panties all bunched up over an ad that passes all legal guidelines.
Wow! Ignorance must be bliss! Since when, when you say mine is 10.1 and yours is only 9.7, with no footnote indicated, not a size comparison? The heading clearly says "display size" and clearly gives a number that is bigger. It does not take a genius to figure out how purposefully misleading this is when in fact the "display size" is significantly SMALLER. This has nothing to do with the footnote at the bottom that says images are not to scale. And by the way, why would you not give them to scale when your heading is "compare tablets" and you've indicated that size is one of the criteria?
The Asus tablet at 10.1 and a true resolution of 1366 x 768 is 33% greater than the 1024 x 768 that content is rendered then upscaled to retina resolution.
Load a webpage on each device side by side Machead and notice the Windows Asus tablet is displaying 33% more of the page.
God you people have got to be the stupidest userbase in all of computing including the original article author and this moron parroting it.
I'm guessing they meant natively.
Off topic: What's with the sudden influx of new posters (trolls)?
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60
Interesting, Microsoft states that iPads can only print to AirPrint printers, wrong I use Netgear genie to print to any printer on my network.
There are Apps for that.
You might be interested in reading how Airprint was first enabled by default on all shared printers connected to a Mac and then mysteriously removed by Apple in an apparent deal with HP.
http://arstechnica.com/apple/2010/11/developers-discover-hack-to-enable-shared-printers-for-airprint/
This is because the iPad actually renders at 1024 x 768 then simple upscales the image./
If you Macheads don't believe me then place your beloved iPad next to any Win8 tablet and load the same webpage and compare.
BTW I tried to post first but because I use Noscript, Ghostery and ABP my post didn't work. Then I disabled my content filtering et al and guess what...
This site has over 35 tracker java scripts in this page alone.
It's the most retarded use of redundant tracking services I've ever seen.
It seems not only are the general apple user base ignorant of technical details but also the author of the original article and this shit article and website PAID by Apple to report such things.