Then something is wrong with your sensory and motor skills. I suggest that you get it checked out by medical professionals. Or perhaps you are currently on medication that is dulling your senses.
This topic is not about CPU specs or dual core or quad core or whatever. This topic is about lag and response time, and that absolutely blows on Android, making Android devices unusable for most tasks.
You are so full of it. Time to try a different brand of koolaid.
That's the problems with guys (trolls) like you. Even when the facts are staring right at you, you turn the other way and pretend they don't exist.
Android performance has improved, but only because they are throwing higher-horsepower hardware to compensate for what really, truly is a trash of an OS. The new iP5s with 1/2 the cores and 1/2 the ram is better performing than a new, quad-core GS4. Figure it out.
I've used my friend's S4 and Nexus tablets on occasion. The article has it spot on. When one uses an iPhone/iPad as their primary device, one can easily spot the lag that is so prevalent in these Android devices. I certainly do, and it's not subtle.
Go away.
You guys are brainwashed. Unbelievable. The Nexus 7 is the smoothest tablet ever.
Really? Get your facts straight before you dismiss everything as garbage. I own an iPad and a nexus 7 and the nexus is an amazing machine faster than iPad 4 with iOS 7. The specs are more than double than the iPad. Yes yes I get it specs isn't anything!
the key question is how much latency is at all noticable to a user. is there an authoritative study on that? a tenth of a second (100 milliseconds)? if that is the threshold, then these results are significant. but if two tenths of a second, then it doesn't really matter.
You are so full of it. Time to try a different brand of koolaid.
That's the problems with guys (trolls) like you. Even when the facts are staring right at you, you turn the other way and pretend they don't exist.
Android performance has improved, but only because they are throwing higher-horsepower hardware to compensate for what really, truly is a trash of an OS. The new iP5s with 1/2 the cores and 1/2 the ram is better performing than a new, quad-core GS4. Figure it out.
I've used my friend's S4 and Nexus tablets on occasion. The article has it spot on. When one uses an iPhone/iPad as their primary device, one can easily spot the lag that is so prevalent in these Android devices. I certainly do, and it's not subtle.
Go away.
You guys are brainwashed. Unbelievable. The Nexus 7 is the smoothest tablet ever.
I guess that would be smooth, like they described the Galaxy Tab sales when they needed a good euphemism for slow?
But seriously- what's your explanation for the test results? Stage fright?
the key question is how much latency is at all noticable to a user. is there an authoritative study on that? a tenth of a second (100 milliseconds)? if that is the threshold, then these results are significant. but if two tenths of a second, then it doesn't really matter.
does anyone know?
Depending on the application, humans can definitely notice a 100 ms latency, as demonstrated in this rather informative microsoft research video
the key question is how much latency is at all noticable to a user. is there an authoritative study on that? a tenth of a second (100 milliseconds)? if that is the threshold, then these results are significant. but if two tenths of a second, then it doesn't really matter.
does anyone know?
A tenth of a second is an eternity, and it's definitely far lower than that.
Every single millisecond counts. Check out this video demoing low latency screens, and maybe you'll get a clearer idea of how much of a difference different latency times makes.
User experience is more important than specs. Apple gets it. The fact that there is lag and stutter on the Galaxy Note 3 is unacceptable. My source? MKBHD on You Tube, and he loves Android.
the key question is how much latency is at all noticable to a user. is there an authoritative study on that? a tenth of a second (100 milliseconds)? if that is the threshold, then these results are significant. but if two tenths of a second, then it doesn't really matter.
does anyone know?
It probably varies from person to person. When I switched from Apple to Android a few years ago it was definitely noticeable and one of the bigger detractors. It did get much better when Android introduced 'butter' but its still not as good as Apple.
It doesn't mean anything because the perceptible difference is negligible to most users. They all run apps, surf the net, play movies.
Androids do all this for half the price of an iPad in many cases, and that's a lot of money.
Since you brought it up, you know what apathy boggles my mind? Why doesn't anyone care that apple charges a hundred dollars more for 15 bucks worth of additional memory? The difference between 16 and 32GB is NOT a hundred dollars. Hell, the difference between 16 and 64 isn't a hundred dollars. Talk about a racket.
Only a complete moron thinks that price is what makes a great device! Especially when the companies making the cheaper products are losing money on their race to the bottom - about as brilliant as their users.
Fandroids have long disputed this and they often lie through their teeth claiming stuff like "Android is no longer laggy, it's been fixed in the last update, blah blah blah!". They've been saying that for years now. Don't these pathetic people and lowlifes get tired of lying all of the time?
It's good that more and more of these tests are showing just how far ahead Apple is. Most other devices are basically unusable. Going from an Android device to an iOS device must be like pure heaven. It's like going from eating out of garbage cans in a dark back alley to eating at a five star restaurant. The difference is not small, to put it mildly.
Like the article says, any sort of games or apps that require low latencies is far, far better on iOS, no question about it. The whole experience is better.
Like I've always said, Android is garbage, the user experience is so bad, that it's like torture. I have no time for disgusting lag when I am using a device. To be honest, I'd rather be waterboarded than having to use an Android tablet. Look at those latency figures for Android! What an embarrassing joke!
Really? Get your facts straight before you dismiss everything as garbage. I own an iPad and a nexus 7 and the nexus is an amazing machine faster than iPad 4 with iOS 7. The specs are more than double than the iPad. Yes yes I get it specs isn't anything!
Keep up there!
This...from the article...
"...and Nvidia's Shield, an Android dedicated gaming device with graphics specifications similar to the iPhone 5s"
....is a perfect encapsulation of your logic fail. Even the Shield, with high end graphics specs is slower than last uear's iPad. And the range figures are shaming.
Why isn't your head exploding?
Those iOS devises are fast. I don't care if they are Microcrap, Scamsung or whatever, throw them out and get Apple, I want my pilot using the best.
"Hi, this is your Delta pilot speaking. We will fix the problem causing this aircraft to plummet as soon as our non Apple tablet manuals respond and we can look up what to do."
Really? Get your facts straight before you dismiss everything as garbage. I own an iPad and a nexus 7 and the nexus is an amazing machine faster than iPad 4 with iOS 7. The specs are more than double than the iPad. Yes yes I get it specs isn't anything!
Why is the response time for the iPad 4 81 milliseconds and the response time for the Nexus 7 114 milliseconds according to the scientific tests carried out in this article?
The iPad's response time is 27% faster than the Nexus 7, real numbers not your dubious anecdotal tale.
It doesn't mean anything because the perceptible difference is negligible to most users. They all run apps, surf the net, play movies.
Androids do all this for half the price of an iPad in many cases, and that's a lot of money.
Since you brought it up, you know what apathy boggles my mind? Why doesn't anyone care that apple charges a hundred dollars more for 15 bucks worth of additional memory? The difference between 16 and 32GB is NOT a hundred dollars. Hell, the difference between 16 and 64 isn't a hundred dollars. Talk about a racket.
It is, for music creation, which is why Android is only suitable for toy like consumption devices.
Why did Samsung advertise my S4 as a 16GB device, yet there is only a little over 8GB available?
Their stupid "switch" software shit itself when I was trying to sync a 16GB iPhone backup.
Wasted money on a $10 micro SD card (as preached by the fandroids), which ran so hot the plastic back almost melted, had to spend another fifty bucks on a decent one.
It doesn't mean anything because the perceptible difference is negligible to most users. They all run apps, surf the net, play movies.
Androids do all this for half the price of an iPad in many cases, and that's a lot of money.
Since you brought it up, you know what apathy boggles my mind? Why doesn't anyone care that apple charges a hundred dollars more for 15 bucks worth of additional memory? The difference between 16 and 32GB is NOT a hundred dollars. Hell, the difference between 16 and 64 isn't a hundred dollars. Talk about a racket.
I'm so tired of this moronic drivel about Apple over charging for storage increases.
1) Of course it doesn't cost $100 for Apple to go from 16GB to 32GB. If it did, Apple would be selling it for cost. Why would they do that? Oh that's right, it's evil for companies to make money.
2) People who say the cost is really only a few dollars a) don't have access to Apple's supply chain and b) are looking at the cost of CHEAP NAND.
3) It is entirely possible that the 16GB entry option is priced at a lower than normal margin, with the extra margins on storage increases helping offset this. Common practice.
Comments
Really? Get your facts straight before you dismiss everything as garbage. I own an iPad and a nexus 7 and the nexus is an amazing machine faster than iPad 4 with iOS 7. The specs are more than double than the iPad. Yes yes I get it specs isn't anything!
Yet you felt you had to mention them.
You guys are brainwashed. Unbelievable. The Nexus 7 is the smoothest tablet ever.
I get it... you're the comedy relief right??
How long have you been a legend in your own mind?
I'm sure it is, Mr. Furley.
[VIDEO]
So it's your brain that's damaged?
the key question is how much latency is at all noticable to a user. is there an authoritative study on that? a tenth of a second (100 milliseconds)? if that is the threshold, then these results are significant. but if two tenths of a second, then it doesn't really matter.
does anyone know?
I guess that would be smooth, like they described the Galaxy Tab sales when they needed a good euphemism for slow?
But seriously- what's your explanation for the test results? Stage fright?
the key question is how much latency is at all noticable to a user. is there an authoritative study on that? a tenth of a second (100 milliseconds)? if that is the threshold, then these results are significant. but if two tenths of a second, then it doesn't really matter.
does anyone know?
Depending on the application, humans can definitely notice a 100 ms latency, as demonstrated in this rather informative microsoft research video
the key question is how much latency is at all noticable to a user. is there an authoritative study on that? a tenth of a second (100 milliseconds)? if that is the threshold, then these results are significant. but if two tenths of a second, then it doesn't really matter.
does anyone know?
A tenth of a second is an eternity, and it's definitely far lower than that.
Every single millisecond counts. Check out this video demoing low latency screens, and maybe you'll get a clearer idea of how much of a difference different latency times makes.
User experience is more important than specs. Apple gets it. The fact that there is lag and stutter on the Galaxy Note 3 is unacceptable. My source? MKBHD on You Tube, and he loves Android.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9NSBB-kFDGQ
That video, or is there another?
the key question is how much latency is at all noticable to a user. is there an authoritative study on that? a tenth of a second (100 milliseconds)? if that is the threshold, then these results are significant. but if two tenths of a second, then it doesn't really matter.
does anyone know?
It probably varies from person to person. When I switched from Apple to Android a few years ago it was definitely noticeable and one of the bigger detractors. It did get much better when Android introduced 'butter' but its still not as good as Apple.
Only a complete moron thinks that price is what makes a great device! Especially when the companies making the cheaper products are losing money on their race to the bottom - about as brilliant as their users.
Awesomely said!!!!!!!
Keep up there!
This...from the article...
"...and Nvidia's Shield, an Android dedicated gaming device with graphics specifications similar to the iPhone 5s"
....is a perfect encapsulation of your logic fail. Even the Shield, with high end graphics specs is slower than last uear's iPad. And the range figures are shaming.
Why isn't your head exploding?
So it's your brain that's damaged?
He's been hanging out with Eric Schmidt too much..."Hi, this is your Delta pilot speaking. We will fix the problem causing this aircraft to plummet as soon as our non Apple tablet manuals respond and we can look up what to do."
Really? Get your facts straight before you dismiss everything as garbage. I own an iPad and a nexus 7 and the nexus is an amazing machine faster than iPad 4 with iOS 7. The specs are more than double than the iPad. Yes yes I get it specs isn't anything!
Why is the response time for the iPad 4 81 milliseconds and the response time for the Nexus 7 114 milliseconds according to the scientific tests carried out in this article?
The iPad's response time is 27% faster than the Nexus 7, real numbers not your dubious anecdotal tale.
It doesn't mean anything because the perceptible difference is negligible to most users. They all run apps, surf the net, play movies.
Androids do all this for half the price of an iPad in many cases, and that's a lot of money.
Since you brought it up, you know what apathy boggles my mind? Why doesn't anyone care that apple charges a hundred dollars more for 15 bucks worth of additional memory? The difference between 16 and 32GB is NOT a hundred dollars. Hell, the difference between 16 and 64 isn't a hundred dollars. Talk about a racket.
It is, for music creation, which is why Android is only suitable for toy like consumption devices.
Why did Samsung advertise my S4 as a 16GB device, yet there is only a little over 8GB available?
Their stupid "switch" software shit itself when I was trying to sync a 16GB iPhone backup.
Wasted money on a $10 micro SD card (as preached by the fandroids), which ran so hot the plastic back almost melted, had to spend another fifty bucks on a decent one.
Talk about a freaking racket.
I'm so tired of this moronic drivel about Apple over charging for storage increases.
1) Of course it doesn't cost $100 for Apple to go from 16GB to 32GB. If it did, Apple would be selling it for cost. Why would they do that? Oh that's right, it's evil for companies to make money.
2) People who say the cost is really only a few dollars a) don't have access to Apple's supply chain and b) are looking at the cost of CHEAP NAND.
3) It is entirely possible that the 16GB entry option is priced at a lower than normal margin, with the extra margins on storage increases helping offset this. Common practice.