Read the full article at:
https://www.techspot.com/review/514-apple-ipad-3/
Please leave your feedback here.
https://www.techspot.com/review/514-apple-ipad-3/
Please leave your feedback here.
Apple's New iPad: The TechSpot Review
- Thread starter Shawn Knight
- Start date
G
Guest
Come on Asus - where is that 4G transformer with Win8 ? Sorry Apple, your design just ain't as good.
G
Guest
Yeah and I'd bet you don't have an iPad either. 60 million people at least disagree with you.
G
Guest
What's not as good? What's better?
Simply claiming that it's just not as good doesn't do yourself any justice as a commenter. It only shows that you're biased towards a specific product and haven't done any personal research.
Personally, I've been weighing the ASUS eee Transformer Prime (TF201) against the "new iPad". I haven't bought either yet. There are features from both which I find appealing, but it'll take me a couple of months to commit I'm sure.
The features of both brands will come down to personal requirements. There are a wide array of variances between them. Cost, OS, supportability, availability of apps, being just a few major concerns.
Simply claiming that it's just not as good doesn't do yourself any justice as a commenter. It only shows that you're biased towards a specific product and haven't done any personal research.
Personally, I've been weighing the ASUS eee Transformer Prime (TF201) against the "new iPad". I haven't bought either yet. There are features from both which I find appealing, but it'll take me a couple of months to commit I'm sure.
The features of both brands will come down to personal requirements. There are a wide array of variances between them. Cost, OS, supportability, availability of apps, being just a few major concerns.
G
Guest
But I bet over 59 million of them have never heard of an Asus Transformer. Inferior or not, the iPad wins because of Apple...
Still don't know why they have gone with a 2,048 x 1,536 display... ( 2 x 1024x768)
Is that just so they can claim "higher definition that full HD". I know with putting videos onto other apple devices in the past you basically had to transcode everything to the resolution of the device. Hopefully they can use the power of the new GPU and processor to do this on the fly otherwise the "Ours is the biggest mentality" just inconveniences the end user.
Is that just so they can claim "higher definition that full HD". I know with putting videos onto other apple devices in the past you basically had to transcode everything to the resolution of the device. Hopefully they can use the power of the new GPU and processor to do this on the fly otherwise the "Ours is the biggest mentality" just inconveniences the end user.
G
Guest
I don't have an Etch-a-Sketch, but I hear it is a super stable platform, so far ahead in it's class that nothing else can touch it!
I think the iPad is safe, as is the Etch-a-Sketch. Both leaders in their game. Anything else is just a faint reflection of the original.
My random question was "What's the next version of Windows?" I answered Omega but it didn't accept that as correct. I disagree! Anyone that doesn't should invest all their money into Monopoly$oft stock to back up their opinion. AAPL anyone?
I think the iPad is safe, as is the Etch-a-Sketch. Both leaders in their game. Anything else is just a faint reflection of the original.
My random question was "What's the next version of Windows?" I answered Omega but it didn't accept that as correct. I disagree! Anyone that doesn't should invest all their money into Monopoly$oft stock to back up their opinion. AAPL anyone?
G
Guest
I have an IPad 1, IPad 2, IPad 3, IPhone 4 and an IPhone 4S and I have been hoping they would get better with each version. I bought the IPhone because verizon never got a good Win7 phone. I also have several Android tablets but I can't stand using them. Outside of one or two things, Apple expects you to buy the newest device because it told you to. With Windows 8, the IPad 3 will be the last device I will buy. Just because there are 60 million devices out there, doesn't mean that there aren't alot of us who hate Apple and the way they do things. The device has alot of issues and outside of a toy, not much use. Just ask all the businesses that have integrated the IPad into there world. We have been waiting for an alternative and I hope we finally get one. A device that will work all of my business apps and do things that aren't certified by apple, I can't wait.
G
Guest
We're deploying those Asus knockoff MacBook Air laptops at work. The keys on the keyboard are crooked and there are other low-quality aspects of the machines. Apple wins on more than reputation.
DanUK
Posts: 224 +12
Nice review! Still can't bring myself to buy a tablet tho. Just dont see the need (my phone does all the mobile entertainment just fine).
And this may just be me being picky but in your tables when dealing with large numbers it might be useful to add in commas, for example:
999393728 texels/sec compared to 1978408960 texels/sec
It's not immediately obvious which number is bigger or by how much.
999,393,728 texels/sec compared to 1,978,408,960 texels/sec seems a bit clearer no?
And this may just be me being picky but in your tables when dealing with large numbers it might be useful to add in commas, for example:
999393728 texels/sec compared to 1978408960 texels/sec
It's not immediately obvious which number is bigger or by how much.
999,393,728 texels/sec compared to 1,978,408,960 texels/sec seems a bit clearer no?
The most important reason Apple went with this resolution over 1080p is that the original iPad is 1024x768. Any deviation from this aspect ratio (or even resolution ratio: 2048 x 1536 is effectively four times the resolution), and most elements of the UI and third party apps would have had to be redone.
Instead the decision was the same as with the iPhone, keep the same ratios and simplify things for in-house and third party developers. Besides, it'd appear that Apple has made the conscious decision to keep the 4:3 screen on the iPad, not just from a design standpoint but also based on usability. Regardless of whether they are right or not (on what's best), it was their call to make.
G
Guest
Another way of looking at the new resolution would be to say that the pixels are 4 times smaller!! Now that's impressive!!!!
IMO we won't be seeing other companies coming up with similar resolution until 2013; probably late 2013.
IMO we won't be seeing other companies coming up with similar resolution until 2013; probably late 2013.
G
Guest
"Outside of one or two things, Apple expects you to buy the newest device because it told you to. With Windows 8, the IPad 3 will be the last device I will buy. Just because there are 60 million devices out there, doesn't mean that there aren't alot of us who hate Apple and the way they do things. The device has alot of issues and outside of a toy, not much use."
What use do tablets NOT have?
They're currently being used as flight maps by airline pilots, as endless books of sheet music for students at Julliard.. ANY field where you need to collect data and take pictures, a tablet/iPad is handy.
For my recording studio alone, having a touchscreen that can be a controller at home or a synth on the road and just about anything in between is hardly a toy.
Then again, if all you need is something to browse the web with, why not stick with the first iPad.
I don't know ANY Apple users that upgrade every version. Whatever reason you're compelled to do so is on you. Though, as an AAPL investor, I say knock yourself out!
What use do tablets NOT have?
They're currently being used as flight maps by airline pilots, as endless books of sheet music for students at Julliard.. ANY field where you need to collect data and take pictures, a tablet/iPad is handy.
For my recording studio alone, having a touchscreen that can be a controller at home or a synth on the road and just about anything in between is hardly a toy.
Then again, if all you need is something to browse the web with, why not stick with the first iPad.
I don't know ANY Apple users that upgrade every version. Whatever reason you're compelled to do so is on you. Though, as an AAPL investor, I say knock yourself out!
G
Guest
"Simply put, it's unlike anything you've ever seen before"
NO, it IS like EVERYTHING else we always see. the human eye can only see so many pixels. apple's pixel count on this small of a display is a total waste of money. after lengthy research, and i really dont care what anyone else says, this display is useless. this tablet does NOTHING....NOTHING else differently than any of the other tablets out on the market, and for several hundreds of dollars more. if you want to throw away your cash, go ahead and get one.
let the flaming begin
NO, it IS like EVERYTHING else we always see. the human eye can only see so many pixels. apple's pixel count on this small of a display is a total waste of money. after lengthy research, and i really dont care what anyone else says, this display is useless. this tablet does NOTHING....NOTHING else differently than any of the other tablets out on the market, and for several hundreds of dollars more. if you want to throw away your cash, go ahead and get one.
let the flaming begin
SNGX1275
Posts: 10,615 +467
5/10, I'll only give you that because I'm replying. So you did a good enough job to get me to reply.
k, You said the pixel count is worthless here. Ok you did lengthy research on this and you came to the conclusion resolution is worthless. Can you enlighten us with a few sources?
You don't care what this iPad does, you hate it already. It does "nothing differently" than any others out there.
Are you serious? I don't think you have ever used any tablet or smartphone.
Several hundred dollars more? Fking sign me up man!!!!, if you have something that is several hundred dollars less than the iPad3 that has the same (or, well as you exclaim, even better stuffs!) then I want one.
I don't know if you've seen a 300+ ppi LCD, but there's a really noticeable, pleasant difference.. so I'm all for it.
The new LCD costs Apple $20 more to include (a cost which they are eating with lower profit margins). The UI scales to the new resolution and so does video, so there aren't any scaling issues where stuff gets too tiny. I can see nothing but good here.
G
Guest
Ok... everything aside. We see once again that Apple are charging top dollar for something that people already have. With this in mind... The Retina display, is the 'Key' Feature apparently that everyone keeps slabbering on about.
Firstly, Apple's screen on the previous iPad, Aspect Ratio and Resolution was crap. It was obvious that this needed updated. The resolution they have now is fantastic, a great achievement, but why so many pixels for such a small screen? There is obviously a point where when you shrink something over and over again, you get to a threshhold where the changes are then no longer relevant (visually), i believe its reached this point since you need a Microscope to view the actual pixels. Really when you think about it, because their screen is THAT good, theoritically they dont ever need to change the pixel density or resolution ever on any future iPad. Anything more is a waste of battery power and resources.
Secondly, because of the aspect ratio on the device, Apple are still failing to meet todays standards. Widescreen has now been a screen standard for years, old 4:3 displays... i cant even remember the last time i've seen one for sale. Everything is 16:9 or 16:10 depending on how high the resolution goes. 4:3 displays are a waste of screen real-estate even at the smallest pixel numbers. When you watch an HD Movie on the new iPad, say a 1080p film in landscape, you have approx 58,000 pixels doing nothing. Its not a lot when your talking about millions of pixels but the screens on these devices already use about 50% of your battery power per full charge to depletion with average usage. With screen technology as good as what it is now and battery technology suffering severely, i want every pixel being used 100% of the time no matter whats on screen when the screen is on.
Another note worth pointing out is that the Resolution of the iPad is the maximum that the Tegra 3 can support in its current setup. With most applications for these types of devices, i cant speak for Apple as i have never owned one, they display at the native resolution so what happens when you try and open a game and is attempts to run as fast as possible at its native resolution, do you think its going to run at 60fps @ 2048x1536? My laptop cant do 60fps at lower resolutions. Its also going to push the GPU and its many cores to its max, rapidly depleting battery and turning your thigh into a spit roast.
I know what i want in the next few weeks, i want the system fully benchmarked with an application that is used on Android OS and iOS which fully utilises all system resources at the native resolutions and compared with any other Tegra 3 Device at comparable resolutuion. You will see then why the Retina Display is not such a cool thing. Dont get me wrong, if you are reading an online newspaper, everything is going to look very crisp. But you dont have a Tegra 3 chipset in a device to surf the internet do you?? Its there to ease system strain with intensive applications, or gaming or rendering of some kind. Actually what they should have done was underclocked the Tegra 3 and its 12 cores to 1Gz, still plenty of power and reduced battery load and heat.
Whilst reading through some of the video reviews also, can anyone explain to me why, the iPad vs the Prime, the vsual benchmarks are showing lesser detail on the iPad, im sure we've all seen the missing flags from the Shadowgun start scene and missing details in the Waveracer game. What i would say to that, is that the Tegra 3 in both devices has the same capabilities, if flags or other advances rendering techniques or real-time physics elements have been removed and dumbed down, i wouldnt touch it. I would rather have a game, or something intense, running at native resolution which as much detail as it could handle, going no lower than 45fps rather than 60fps and dumbed down quality. Since the Retina display is the biggest things since the extinction of the DoDo, im sure all you Apple users will agree that it should be Quality over performance
Sorry, i had to get that off of my chest!
Firstly, Apple's screen on the previous iPad, Aspect Ratio and Resolution was crap. It was obvious that this needed updated. The resolution they have now is fantastic, a great achievement, but why so many pixels for such a small screen? There is obviously a point where when you shrink something over and over again, you get to a threshhold where the changes are then no longer relevant (visually), i believe its reached this point since you need a Microscope to view the actual pixels. Really when you think about it, because their screen is THAT good, theoritically they dont ever need to change the pixel density or resolution ever on any future iPad. Anything more is a waste of battery power and resources.
Secondly, because of the aspect ratio on the device, Apple are still failing to meet todays standards. Widescreen has now been a screen standard for years, old 4:3 displays... i cant even remember the last time i've seen one for sale. Everything is 16:9 or 16:10 depending on how high the resolution goes. 4:3 displays are a waste of screen real-estate even at the smallest pixel numbers. When you watch an HD Movie on the new iPad, say a 1080p film in landscape, you have approx 58,000 pixels doing nothing. Its not a lot when your talking about millions of pixels but the screens on these devices already use about 50% of your battery power per full charge to depletion with average usage. With screen technology as good as what it is now and battery technology suffering severely, i want every pixel being used 100% of the time no matter whats on screen when the screen is on.
Another note worth pointing out is that the Resolution of the iPad is the maximum that the Tegra 3 can support in its current setup. With most applications for these types of devices, i cant speak for Apple as i have never owned one, they display at the native resolution so what happens when you try and open a game and is attempts to run as fast as possible at its native resolution, do you think its going to run at 60fps @ 2048x1536? My laptop cant do 60fps at lower resolutions. Its also going to push the GPU and its many cores to its max, rapidly depleting battery and turning your thigh into a spit roast.
I know what i want in the next few weeks, i want the system fully benchmarked with an application that is used on Android OS and iOS which fully utilises all system resources at the native resolutions and compared with any other Tegra 3 Device at comparable resolutuion. You will see then why the Retina Display is not such a cool thing. Dont get me wrong, if you are reading an online newspaper, everything is going to look very crisp. But you dont have a Tegra 3 chipset in a device to surf the internet do you?? Its there to ease system strain with intensive applications, or gaming or rendering of some kind. Actually what they should have done was underclocked the Tegra 3 and its 12 cores to 1Gz, still plenty of power and reduced battery load and heat.
Whilst reading through some of the video reviews also, can anyone explain to me why, the iPad vs the Prime, the vsual benchmarks are showing lesser detail on the iPad, im sure we've all seen the missing flags from the Shadowgun start scene and missing details in the Waveracer game. What i would say to that, is that the Tegra 3 in both devices has the same capabilities, if flags or other advances rendering techniques or real-time physics elements have been removed and dumbed down, i wouldnt touch it. I would rather have a game, or something intense, running at native resolution which as much detail as it could handle, going no lower than 45fps rather than 60fps and dumbed down quality. Since the Retina display is the biggest things since the extinction of the DoDo, im sure all you Apple users will agree that it should be Quality over performance
Sorry, i had to get that off of my chest!
Note I say nothing about the PPI of the screen but only about what I find a peculiar choice of screen H and V resolution. I think the high PPI of the screen is great. Especially at the low price difference it is being offered at.
It seems it is a recognized resolution in the mishmash of standards, just one that wasn't really in use. I appreciate technology being pushed forward but with a device for media consumption such as HD movies streaming (1920x1080 or 1280x720) I struggle to follow the reasoning for this choice. I'm sure there is a whole department or two at Apple behind this choice and knowing what they do I'd probably find the choice less baffling.
Kinda what I've been trying to say as well, thanks Guest.
G
Guest
I'm sitting this one out and hoping for Siri support on the NEW new iPad. I probably only have a year or two to wait.
I use my iPad 2 all the time and I have to say that after playing with the new iPad at a local retailer, I have to say that, foe me, there is a HUGE difference with the new display. It is obviously sharper and much easier on my eyes. With that being said I will be sticking with my iPad 2 for the foreseeable future because as good as the display is, I just can't justify the cost just for that.
By the way, I am not a Apple fan boy. In fact I despised Apple and resisted buying anything from them for years. In that time I tried MANY of the Android phones and tablets out there and (for me) the Apple stuff wins hands down. Now I use a iPhone 4s and iPad 2 and am looking into get a MAC. I guess I converted but with all that, I am getting the new Nokia Windows phone as soon as its available.
By the way, I am not a Apple fan boy. In fact I despised Apple and resisted buying anything from them for years. In that time I tried MANY of the Android phones and tablets out there and (for me) the Apple stuff wins hands down. Now I use a iPhone 4s and iPad 2 and am looking into get a MAC. I guess I converted but with all that, I am getting the new Nokia Windows phone as soon as its available.
Similar threads
