Related
Hi all.I just bought an ipad and i would like to share some thoughts on how this two compares. I decide for first gen, because its was on sale, 32 GB 3g version for just 499€ (with some extra discount) and software wise its pretty much like his young brother.
Build quality is much better than folio, it dont even compares. It fell solid as hell.
The screen is very good, but just a bit smaller than the one on folio.
One thing it misses are the stereo speakers. I would say that folio had in fact better sound.
Speed wise folio is faster. Pages load a lot faster and apps too. Despite that ipad does still runs fine for most apps and games.
Apps in ipad are much richer and polished... And app store is clean and well organised than android market.
Of course ipad doesnt have flash support but this days some major sites are jumping into html5. Still folio is taking the lead here.
One other thing that can give the edge to ipad are accessories... Most are very expensive though There are lots and lots of staff to improve ipad usability. In other hand folio doesnt need to be connect to an pc to get started, and you can use sd cards for grabbing content. Ipad does need to connect to a pc or mac for kick start, and It doesnt sync over the air.
Costumization is very poor under iOS and android is more open in terms of its homescreen replacements.
Ipad keyboard is not as good as other android keyboards just like thumbs keyboard, but its definetly better tha stock android keyboard.
Ipad is very stable and clean... Folio have lots of bugs and it crashes a lot.
Office suite from apple is a must and surpasses android apps on this matter.
One thing Ipad misses is hdmi out, but even using standard AV adaptor output is quite good. It also doesnt do 1080p, but again video is still very good. Folio hdmi output take the lead here.
Apple support is great and you can get extend protection in top of that. Toshiba support is as bad as We all know. One other thing is that with ipad you are sure that you will get iOS updates.
I will say that ipad is a more solid and finished product. Folio was a good try but its not as good as specs suggests, mainly because software and hardware issues that toshiba doesnt wont to fix.
I also would like to refer that battery life on Ipad is quite good, not to say outstanding. Folio is on average but not as long...
bastospn said:
Hi all.I just bought an ipad and i would like to share some thoughts on how this two compares. I decide for first gen, because its was on sale, 32 GB 3g version for just 499€ (with some extra discount) and software wise its pretty much like his young brother.
Build quality is much better than folio, it dont even compares. It fell solid as hell.
The screen is very good, but just a bit smaller than the one on folio.
One thing it misses are the stereo speakers. I would say that folio had in fact better sound.
Speed wise folio is faster. Pages load a lot faster and apps too. Despite that ipad does still runs fine for most apps and games.
Apps in ipad are much richer and polished... And app store is clean and well organised than android market.
Of course ipad doesnt have flash support but this days some major sites are jumping into html5. Still folio is taking the lead here.
One other thing that can give the edge to ipad are accessories... Most are very expensive though There are lots and lots of staff to improve ipad usability. In other hand folio doesnt need to be connect to an pc to get started, and you can use sd cards for grabbing content. Ipad does need to connect to a pc or mac for kick start, and It doesnt sync over the air.
Costumization is very poor under iOS and android is more open in terms of its homescreen replacements.
Ipad keyboard is not as good as other android keyboards just like thumbs keyboard, but its definetly better tha stock android keyboard.
Ipad is very stable and clean... Folio have lots of bugs and it crashes a lot.
Office suite from apple is a must and surpasses android apps on this matter.
One thing Ipad misses is hdmi out, but even using standard AV adaptor output is quite good. It also doesnt do 1080p, but again video is still very good. Folio hdmi output take the lead here.
Apple support is great and you can get extend protection in top of that. Toshiba support is as bad as We all know. One other thing is that with ipad you are sure that you will get iOS updates.
I will say that ipad is a more solid and finished product. Folio was a good try but its not as good as specs suggests, mainly because software and hardware issues that toshiba doesnt wont to fix.
I also would like to refer that battery life on Ipad is quite good, not to say outstanding. Folio is on average but not as long...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Couldn't agree more, that's exactly what I felt when using both as well.
In respect to graphics, tegra 2 as of course better potencial. But the shortage of tegra 2 optimized games is here to last...
How smooth is the folio with foliomod v1.4 compared to the iPad when using the Internet? I'm having a hard time convincing myself not to choose the iPad over the folio. But folio is so much cheaper and more fun loading new roms and home replacements and such....
I find the iPad (gen1) very slow for web browsing, plus you are much more restricted about the choice of browsers. There are some big differences between the two, which one is best will depend on where your priorities are. Not having to use itunes to manage my (legally paid for) music is a huge plus for the folio for me.
tshoulihane said:
I find the iPad (gen1) very slow for web browsing, plus you are much more restricted about the choice of browsers. There are some big differences between the two, which one is best will depend on where your priorities are. Not having to use itunes to manage my (legally paid for) music is a huge plus for the folio for me.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Does the foliomod rom improve the internet experience? Is there a video somewhere? I´ve seen the video with foliomod 0.2, but is there any newer? perhaps with a comparison?
How does it handle flash, like HDmt.net for example? Would it be possible to run that and display it to a tv? Does the tv mirror what´s on your device or does the folio´s screen turn black?
Btw, I think itunes sync is a plus... (But a option would be great...)
tshoulihane said:
I find the iPad (gen1) very slow for web browsing, plus you are much more restricted about the choice of browsers. There are some big differences between the two, which one is best will depend on where your priorities are. Not having to use itunes to manage my (legally paid for) music is a huge plus for the folio for me.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Browsing it's not terrible slow on Ipad, but sure is slower than Folio. I think the main problem here is the lack of RAM, this happens when you have lots of tabs open. You can use Life browser that is in my opinion works better than Ipad.
You have lots and lots of browser for iOS, but hardware limitations are of course still affecting performance.
I 100% agree that itunes is not the best tool in the world to organize you music, but I guess I can live with that.
The answer is a big YES. you will get awesome browsing experience with FolioMod.
Still in my opinion it isn't all that stable, maybe because of flash.
You can of course use hdmi out to get a mirror on your TV or LCD display monitor.
Hey guys!
Firstly, I would like to mention that I do not own any tablet, nor any laptop. Now from what I've seen, if I want to buy a tablet, transformer prime is the best out there both in terms of price and hardware.
But my question is, for that same price (500 - 600), could I get any laptop with that kind of size and weight, but have better performance? I absolutely love the android niche and community and the hardware of the device itself. But every now and then I would love to run some old or decent games (morrowind xD, or halo) or perhaps use photoshop etc.... Would such a laptop, light, compact and relatively more powerful, at that price range exist? What are the advantages of a tablet considering my concerns?
Thanks guys!
be nice on the no0b plz
I was in the same case as you are before i bought the original transformer. No laptop no tablet, but a smartphone (HTC Desire) and a powerfull desktop computer.
Here's the thing. At this price point, the laptop you would buy will most likely be very bad on a lot of point. Build weight heat screen battery raw power etc.
But with a tablet. At this price you'll have the best in class.
So Yeah you wont do the same thing on a tablet and on a laptop, but some thing are better on laptop (work, heavy gaming) some are better on tablet (web browsing reading light gaming watching vidéo etc.).
The catch is that your laptop, being a low cost product, wont do its things very well, but the tablet will do what it does perfectly.
I could have bought a cheap laptop and be able to work on my CGs project on the go or play Skyrim everywhere but seriously... who wants to play Skyrim on a ****ty laptop with awfull graphics ? Who wants to work on a tiny screen with a slow ass CPU ? Working is bad enough not to worsening it by doing it with bad tools. And who wants to do this thing for no more than 2 hours top because that's what happen when you do heavy task on battery?
If you Really want to work or play big games on a mobile device, buy a real laptop (1000$+).
If what s your looking for is a mobile entertainement device with internet and some cool creative tools go for a tablet (the Transformer Prime !).
Plus tablet are hype and fun, and the Transformer with dock provide its fair share of "Woa effect " each time I take the screen away of what seemed until now to be a cheap netbook.
First off, a tablet and a laptop aren't really comparable at this point. I would recommend you get a laptop first, because laptops are capable of doing the practical things like word processing and photoshop and the like that tablets can't do yet. Tablets are still primarily "fun" devices compared to laptops (though tablets certainly do have some practical uses).
Yes, any laptop you get in that range will have better specs. I have a laptop in that range, and no tablets have the sort of capabilities my laptop has. But like I said it isn't really comparable, because they are 2 completely different experiences. As far as games, I've only ever played 1 game on my laptop: Homeworld (a 1999 game lol, old game but best RTS ever). Despite how old the game is, it still pushed my laptop to its limit, and I have a i5 processor. The only laptops that can run games well are really expensive, and so in that sense, I actually think in the under $1k range tablets are better for gaming.
Overall, a laptop is a much more practical choice.
the advantages to a tablet at this price point are going to be battery life, weight and touch input.
the advantages to a laptop at this price point are going to be more storage, faster CPU, more versatility when it comes to software.
downside to tablet: limited software (when compared to windows), less raw power
downside to laptop: subjectively worse gaming (at this price point, the tegra3 or ipad2 seem to have more gaming potential for well designed games than a $600 thin and light (as thin and light as possible at the price point) laptop, less battery life, heavier, thicker, no touch input (but possibly better keyboard/touchpad responsiveness)
so in the end, it comes down to what you are going to use your laptop or tablet for, and what features are a priority to you.
i have a laptop that i do actual photoshop/office/illustrator work on, but when i just need to take notes or write emails and stuff (as in, not get actual work work done, but sidework) then the OG transformer and my galaxy tab have been more useful than a tablet because of the lightness and battery life. for me at least.
Laptop is much better. Unless you use it as a supplement to other tech (desktop computer, mobile phone, heavy duty laptop), it is better to have a laptop. While you lose out on battery, it is simply much more powerful and versatile.
Tablet like Prime is useful as a netbook replacement. Something you use during lectures for notes, reading, browsing or viewing videos while on the go (plane, bus, carpooling). It has a long battery life, but is less than adequate for gaming (you cannot play any modern games on it, nor games that were modern ten years ago, even if they look better). It also has barely adequate options for document creation and powerful photo, sound and video editing is nearly impossible. A laptop is also much, much better when multitasking.
But if you have a device for gaming and office work and consider tablet a supplement to those tools, then tablet is absolutely awesome. Tablet is also awesome for people who don't do anything with computers other than reading documents and books, viewing videos and browsing internet. It's also great for kids.
In all honesty though, for the latter category, iPad 2 is a much better option than Transformer Prime.
The best thing Transformer Prime is for, is being a replacement for your netbook and supplement to your laptop/desktop computer.
I already have an iphone 4 and in all honesty I couldn't get myself to buy an ipad knowing that its identical to the phone.
Ive decided to get the Prime instead of replacing my 4 year old laptop.
Wow! You guys are really helpful! I really appreciate thoughtful replies. I have some good insight now!
Thanks again guys!
If you currently own neither laptop nor tablet definitely get laptop. For ~$400 your best option is Lenovo AMD APU E-450 based netbook with better graphics performance/gaming/media decoding than comparable Intel Atom netbook. This will allow you to do everything that you can do on a tablet with the added benefit of access to wider range of software especially productivity and games. If budget allows you can go higher end with Intel i5/i7 CPU, discrete graphics, SSD, etc.
Asus Transformer Prime is a great upgrade for someone familiar with an Android phone ecosystem and is ready to move up in size and performance.
Another option is in lieu of a high end laptop you can buy both the AMD APU netbook and the Asus Transformer Prime. If I was in your position and don't do anything very compute intensive on the x86 side I would go with this option.
mi7chy said:
If you currently own neither laptop nor tablet definitely get laptop. For ~$400 your best option is Lenovo AMD APU E-450 based netbook with better graphics performance/gaming/media decoding than comparable Intel Atom netbook. This will allow you to do everything that you can do on a tablet with the added benefit of access to wider range of software especially productivity and games. If budget allows you can go higher end with Intel i5/i7 CPU, discrete graphics, SSD, etc.
Asus Transformer Prime is a great upgrade for someone familiar with an Android phone ecosystem and is ready to move up in size and performance.
Another option is in lieu of a high end laptop you can buy both the AMD APU netbook and the Asus Transformer Prime. If I was in your position and don't do anything very compute intensive on the x86 side I would go with this option.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Can't say I agree. He has made due without a laptop so far so to assume he would now need that extra functionality over a tablet would be a big assumption.
I currently do not have a laptop or a tablet but am getting the prime. Reason is that while there are a few things the laptop would be better suited for (like better word processing and excel) the fact is I haven't needed a laptop previously for those tasks and do not need them now. The basic office functions on the tablet will work fine for me (can format things at home).
When it comes down to it you need to really think what your main uses will be. For me its portable media consumption (much better on tablet) and annotating pdfs for classes (much better on tablet), and then studying off them. Sure a bit more power would be nice, but a tablet doesn't have to only be a laptop supplement, but a main PC supplement (which could be a desktop)
Hi all,
I know this article has been floating around here for some time, but this I found rather interesting:
Some have raised points along the lines of Samsung Galaxy S2 phones already having a smoother UI and indicating that they are doing something different vs. the Galaxy Nexus. When comparing individual devices though you really need to look at all of the factors. For example, the S2's screen is 480x800 vs. the Galaxy Nexus at 720x1280. If the Nexus S could already do 60fps for simple UIs on its 480x800, the CPU in the S2's is even better off.
The real important difference between these two screens is just that the Galaxy Nexus has 2.4x as many pixels that need to be drawn as the S2. This means that to achieve the same efficiency at drawing the screen, you need a CPU that can run a single core at 2.4x the speed (and rendering a UI for a single app is essentially not parallelizable, so multiple cores isn't going to save you).
This is where hardware accelerated rendering really becomes important: as the number of pixels goes up, GPUs can generally scale much better to handle them, since they are more specialized at their task. In fact this was the primary incentive for implementing hardware accelerated drawing in Android -- at 720x1280 we are well beyond the point where current ARM CPUs can provide 60fps. (And this is a reason to be careful about making comparisons between the Galaxy Nexus and other devices like the S2 -- if you are running third party apps, there is a good chance today that the app is not enabling hardware acceleration, so your comparison is doing CPU rendering on the Galaxy Nexus which means you almost certainly aren't going to get 60fps out of it, because it needs to hit 2.4x as many pixels as the S2 does.)
To be complete, there is another big advantage that the GPU gives you -- many more drawing effects become feasible. For example, if you are drawing a bitmap in software, you basically can't do anything to it except apply an offset. Just trying to scale it is going to make rendering significantly slower. On a GPU, applying transformations well beyond simple scales is basically free. This is why in the new default Holo themes in Android we have background images -- with hardware accelerated drawing, we can afford to draw (and scale) them. In fact, if the hardware path is not enabled by the app, these background images will be turned off.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is kinda the same as with the Prime and the T700/other high-resolution tablets, isn't it? I'm not sure, but it sounds pretty obviously since the Tegra3 GPU isn't very good (yes, it is fine but I'm not sure for those high-res screens?). However I could be completely wrong..
I agree. It's the same with a gaming computer. Just because ur monitor has 1080p doesn't mean u can play all games in that rez. U will need a much more powerful gpu. I am certain though the tegra3 can support 1080p but it won't be smooth as 720p like our device. Unless u lower the rez but how would u on an android. Furthermore how ugly games would look who aren't optimize for 1080p.
Nvidia always!
The question isn't whether there's going to be a performance hit, it's what the performance hit looks like. If it's invisible in everything but gaming, I'd bet a lot of people will go for the HD display and gamers will stick to the lower res. If it's obvious in UI performance and transitions, it makes the benefit of the HD screen a little more questionable. The new chip in the iPad3 and Samsung's new Exynos chip won't make you choose (on paper). Benchmarks are useless except for bragging rights.
I have been saying this since people were trying to compare the new acer and samsung back in Dec. The higher the resolution, the more power and resources it takes. Also you have to look at the app market right now. What app's are out that will use that 1080p display...NONE as of now. Once they (1080p tablets) are released, it will be a few months before most apps will adapt to the new higher displays.
I continue to question the need for having a 1080p 10 inch display- there has to be a limit as to high a ppi count the human eye can reasonably distinguish. Just bumping up the resolution while not working on improving the true render process (in case of games or animations) does not make any sense to me.
A retina display just for the heck of it is not a great idea, at least to me.
For what it's worth, ICS is supposed to be fully hardware accelerated, so the Tegra 3 could be enough to power the higher resolution for everything but games.
Anandtech (who I probably trust the most when it comes to hardware evaluations) seemed to suggest in an early preview that the higher resolution *may* perform ok:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/5348/...-with-asus-1920-x-1200-tablet-running-ics-403
That said, there are still questions as to the benefit of such a high resolution on a 10" form factor designed to be held only 1-2' away from your face. They didn't bump up to 1920 x 1200 resolution monitors until 24" LCDs and up.
The real issue is that games on Android don't let you pick a resolution for them to run at. Almost all run at the full Res of the screen, which means slideshow on a 1080p Prime.
avinash60 said:
I continue to question the need for having a 1080p 10 inch display- there has to be a limit as to high a ppi count the human eye can reasonably distinguish. Just bumping up the resolution while not working on improving the true render process (in case of games or animations) does not make any sense to me.
A retina display just for the heck of it is not a great idea, at least to me.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree, there is just no point..... there is more important things to improve than pixel count....
Thanks, at least I am not alone on this idea. It seems like when the news came that the iPad 3 is going to have a retina desiplay all the manufacturers didn't care anymore and just were thinking "We also need that!". I am comparision the text from thread with my HTC Sensation which should have a better DPI:
Transformer Prime: 149
The new Prime: 218
HTC Sensation: 260
and from NORMAL viewing distance both look great. However, when i come closer the pixels on the Transformer Prime are a little visible where the Sensation stays sharp. However the phone has a better DPI then the new res. panel so I'm not sure how that is.
I'm sure it will look some better, but I am not sure if it is worth the wait (again) and also the possibilty of the new Prime itself can't keep up with its own resolution..
Oh, again not trying to defend the Prime here.. I have to return it anyway because of backlight bleeding and am not sure if I want a new one or my money back, however if I see this result I think the resolution is just pure marketing.. I mean who is going to sit with its prime 5 cm from their heads.. lol.
http://androidandme.com/2012/01/news/hands-on-with-the-acer-iconia-tab-a510-and-zte-7-tablets/
Watch the video on Acer Iconia a510 (unannounced tablet). 1080p that comes with this tablet... does look a bit sluggish.
Just to add my galaxy nexus is 316 dpi..... unless your 2in from the screen...there really isn't much difference.
Also, I love how laptop and desktop DPI is half what most phone/tabs are and people are having a fit......
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_displays_by_pixel_density#ASUS
Seems to run pretty good since it is still a pre-production model, however not as smooth as the Prime with ICS yes..
Danny80y said:
Just to add my galaxy nexus is 316 dpi..... unless your 2in from the screen...there really isn't much difference.
Also, I love how laptop and desktop DPI is half what most phone/tabs are and people are having a fit......
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_displays_by_pixel_density#ASUS
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah, exactly what I mean.. you can see it if your very close to the screen, but why would you do that, lol.
Oh, btw.. for the iPad 1&2 it still is 132, which is much lower then our Transformers (149,5), never heard real complaints about that.
>What app's are out that will use that 1080p display...NONE as of now
eBooks & PDFs. Sharper texts. More texts. One can conceivably view 2 pages side-by-side (16:10 / 2 = 8:10, or close to the 8.5:11 printed page).
With display mirroring, you get 1:1 pixel ratio when plugged into a HDTV via HDMI. This makes above use-case (high-density text consumption) much more feasible. Ditto for remote access.
Gaming perf will take a hit. Then again, gaming isn't exactly an Android forte right now, or for mobiles in general. The bulk of games are casual stuff, geared for handset resolution.
One can argue that hardcore Android gaming will prosper over time, and FPS perf will matter more. There are problems with this line of thought. First, is simply the assumption that Android will prosper on tablets, which given current sales is hardly a forgone conclusion. Second, are the fast advances in hardware and their correspondingly short lifespan. GPU-wise, the Teg3 isn't the fastest even now. By the time we get to see enough hardcore games, we'd be on Teg 5 or 6, or their equivalent. Teg3 will be old news.
But sure, if shooters and frame count are your thing, then 720p sounds like a plan, at least for the Teg3.
>I continue to question the need for having a 1080p 10 inch display
Some don't see the need for GPS in tabs either. Some don't use the cams. Different people have different uses. You shouldn't generalize your use to be everyone else's.
Rest assured that when it comes to marketing, toys with lo-res display will be viewed as inferior. Bigger is better. It's the same thing with quadcore vs dualcore vs single-core. Do you actually need a quadcore?
>there has to be a limit as to high a ppi count the human eye can reasonably distinguish
This argument has been bouncing around ever since Apple's Retina Display. Per this PPI calculator, 1920x1200 is 224ppi on a 10.1". Reportedly, people can discern 300ppi at 12" distance, given 20/20 vision. The real test is simpler and much less theoretical: walk into a store and compare the TF201 and TF700 side-by-side, and see if you can discern the difference.
>Anandtech (who I probably trust the most when it comes to hardware evaluations) seemed to suggest in an early preview that the higher resolution *may* perform ok:
Anandtech is good for chip-level analysis. For (mobile) system hardware and use-case analysis, he's just as green as many other tech blogs. Note the gaffs on the Prime testing wrt GPS and BT/wifi coexistence. I do see signs of improvement, however. They came out with a new Mobile Benchmark suite, whatever that means.
>The real issue is that games on Android don't let you pick a resolution for them to run at.
The real issue is that Android is still a nascent OS for tablets. HC was a beta which never took off. ICS was just released. The bulk of Android apps & games are still for handsets.
I have been concerned about this as well. Tegra 3's GPU is fine enough for a 1200x800 tablet, but it's going to be stretched at 1080p (this is nearly the resolution that my desktop runs at!).
I'd love a higher-resolution display, but it's a luxury (well, a tablet itself kinda is already, but even more so). It's not as if 1280x800 is cramped and blocky. I'm happy to wait a bit longer for 1080p tablets to mature and come down in price.
(I'd rather have 2GB RAM, actually.)
Well, perhaps this new release will coincide with a bump in the specs of Tegra 3. By the time the new tablet comes out, I would assume that's been almost half a year.... That's usually about the time span that nvidia would come out with a refresh of a chip design (well, they do this with their desktop GPUs, so not a great comparison, but it's possible?). So in the end perhaps the question of performance will be moot because there will be a faster Tegra 3 and more RAM in the new higher resolution tablets.
Just a thought.
Don't underestimate.
Let's wait a review or test.
Probably the Tegra 3 is more than capable of handling this kind of resolution in terms of playing HD movie, high profile compression, etc.
I saw several tests on current prime, and it has no problem with HD videos.
My only concern is battery life ... that's all.
I expect the 1920x1200 will result worse battery life, unless ASUS pump up the battery capacity or any other improvement.
JoeyLe said:
Hi all,
I know this article has been floating around here for some time, but this I found rather interesting:
This is kinda the same as with the Prime and the T700/other high-resolution tablets, isn't it? I'm not sure, but it sounds pretty obviously since the Tegra3 GPU isn't very good (yes, it is fine but I'm not sure for those high-res screens?). However I could be completely wrong..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
gogol said:
Don't underestimate.
Let's wait a review or test.
Probably the Tegra 3 is more than capable of handling this kind of resolution in terms of playing HD movie, high profile compression, etc.
I saw several tests on current prime, and it has no problem with HD videos.
My only concern is battery life ... that's all.
I expect the 1920x1200 will result worse battery life, unless ASUS pump up the battery capacity or any other improvement.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Asus has already stated that battery life will be pretty much the same as the current Prime...So that should equal shorter battery life.I'll stick with my Prime for now.No Need in buying another tablet right now IMO.I'm waiting to see what Samsung brings to the table.
hyunsyng said:
Well, perhaps this new release will coincide with a bump in the specs of Tegra 3. By the time the new tablet comes out, I would assume that's been almost half a year.... That's usually about the time span that nvidia would come out with a refresh of a chip design (well, they do this with their desktop GPUs, so not a great comparison, but it's possible?). So in the end perhaps the question of performance will be moot because there will be a faster Tegra 3 and more RAM in the new higher resolution tablets.
Just a thought.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't think they can bump the specs within the generation of a chip. The only thing that can happen till then is that Asus finds an economical way to add 2GB memory to the device, Nvidia improves the production capabilities of Tegra 3 and we get a better yield of the chips. The spec increase can only happen from one generation to the next.
I think the performance will be fine. Even the battery life.
Most of the battery usage screen-wise is from the backlight, which will be the same.
Also, not much more power may be used necessarily either, especially if it doesn't end up taxing the Tegra 3 as much as we think it will. As far as we know, our 1200x800 displays may not even be taxing the Tegra 3 that much. If anything, the article shows that the Tegra 3 may be more qualified to handle that high a resolution with little to no performance degradation. There are demos on youtube of a tegra 3 device playing 1440p movies just fine, all while driving a second screen at the same time.
Of course I too don't feel the need for something that high of a resolution on a 10 inch screen, but I'll never really know until I see one in person.
I just bought a new TS Prime last week and have 30 days to return. I'm thinking of doing so in favor of the TS Infinity. I'm worried that if Asus is no longer shipping the prime due to "defects", that the development community on the Prime will be fade quickly and become very small. I'm curious to see if the new Transformers will be similar enough that roms for each will be easy to port over. Also a full HD screen would be nice but will I be sacrificing smoothness and a lot of battery life as a result?
I'm very torn. I have had no issues with the Prime I just got. Wifi is as good as my Nexus and my GPS locks on in less than 10 seconds every time (only tested indoors). A micro usb slot would be nice but it appears as if none of the new Transformers will have that either. So I'm just asking for some opinions on why I should keep my Prime or return it and wait for the Infinity. If I'm spending 500+ dollars on a device, I'd like it to be pretty future proof.
I don't know of any future proof devices for less than $500. I saw plans for a time machine on ebay but I don't know where to get the crystals.
Just keep the prime. It'll be fine. We already have great developement.
demandarin said:
Just keep the prime. It'll be fine. We already have great developement.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
While this is true ^ for people like me who mostly use their tabs for media, the 1200p screen is great.
Yeah but prime screen is just as good. No one will be able to tell the difference between a 1080P movie and a 720P HD movie on a 10.1 screen. Both will look great. The only difference is text will look a little sharper on infinity pad.
Not saying you, but people forgetting Prime was already crowned the best display out of any tablet before new Ipad arrived. So prime display is still great for watching media also.
Some people get stuck on the 1080P vs. 720P, too much, on a tablet if they want to use it for media. Human eye won't detect a difference in quality on a screen this size. On a big flat screen, yes. But even then its a slight increase in quality.
Now if you want it to read books and magazines then infinity display will be better for that and that's about it. Web pages and such still look very sharp and crisp on prime display. 1080P won't even be useful for gaming because there are no games running at that "true" resolution. THEN although tegra3 will handle it fine, if the exact same gpu or gpu clock speed is used, infinity pad will likely not perform as well as prime. Meaning prime will push faster FPS on games/movies..etc..
I keeping my prime till the new Asus Transformer pads with tegra4 release at end of year or Q1 of 2013. A prime to an infinity is not really much of an upgrade. Newer tegra4 transformer pads will likely have 1080p screen also. Then tegra4 will perform better than tegra3 at that same screen size resolution. Since tegra4 will be far more powerful than tegra3. IT HAS BEEN SAID Tegra4 will likely use same 4+1 core set except this time it'll be with Cortex [email protected] 28nm. Plus it's highly likely its gpu will be keplar based. Now that's something worth waiting for
Thanks, these replies have been quite helpful. Think I will stick with the Prime. I've kinda been falling in love with it. I guess there is always something new on the horizon. So the dockfor the prime won't be compatible with future models, correct?
One more thing, what is currently the best rom on prime. I'm new and just jumped on virtuous cause it seemed popular.
The only reason I'd think about upgrading is with regards to reading ebooks... Guess the better screen will shine on that area. But otherwise there is not much reason, wifi is good enough and couldn't care much less about GPS.
Apart from the screen there is not much reason to upgrade...
About roms, running WSG0.0.6 now which is one of my favourites although the Android Open Kang project rom from jermaine151 is very sweet as well.
>The only reason I'd think about upgrading is with regards to reading ebooks...
The higher res isn't needed for ebooks. If legibility is a problem, you'd just enlarge the fonts. Ebooks are mostly text-only, so content can be reflowed, and it will just fill more pages.
What higher res would be good for is documents with mixed (text+graphics) layouts, and not specifically designed for tablets, eg mags and scientific/academic/trade docs in PDF format. Because text can't be reflowed without messing up the layout, you may not be able to enlarge text font. Then, the higher res allows small text to be more legible. If these types of docs aren't on your menu, then "hi-res" confers no benefit in this area.
One can make the case that "hi-res" would benefit web pages with small text. That argument would work for small displays like smartphones and maybe 7" tabs, but a 10" with 1280x800 is already a larger display res than most web sites are designed for.
That iPad 3 has a "better" display than previous iPad is more due to its better color filters (which allows for richer colors) than its increased res. Hi-res is good to have as a spec, because a quad-XGA will always sound better than just XGA, and 1080p better than 720p. But by itself it's not good enough as an eyes-on benefit. Apple understood this, and also boosted the color rendition.
With the new device coming out, I was wondering if anyone knows if the new surface book/pro 4 stylus would work on the note 12.2. I do not know if they switched back to wacom, but It did not seem to be an active stylus.
The Surface Pro 4 pen is a redesigned N-Trig pen, so no. And the Book pen is a Surface pen.
I really like that i7/Nvidia/16GBRAM/1TB Surface Book. But Microsoft won't tell us exactly which Nvidia GPU is included, which makes me more than a bit suspicious... I don't have $3200, anyway.
ShadowLea said:
The Surface Pro 4 pen is a redesigned N-Trig pen, so no. And the Book pen is a Surface pen.
I really like that i7/Nvidia/16GBRAM/1TB Surface Book. But Microsoft won't tell us exactly which Nvidia GPU is included, which makes me more than a bit suspicious... I don't have $3200, anyway.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I played with a surface book for a bit (2400 dollar version) and it was impressive. I have never wanted to replace my NOTE Pro with a surface pro, but the book was an entirely different experience. I didn't like the magnetic clip for the pen though. No way that thing is in the same place after a ride to work in a backpack. Otherwise nearly perfect. However for $3200 I would look at the Vaio Canvas instead. Then you'll be getting a full quad core desktop CPU and still good battery life.
mjkurke said:
I played with a surface book for a bit (2400 dollar version) and it was impressive. I have never wanted to replace my NOTE Pro with a surface pro, but the book was an entirely different experience. I didn't like the magnetic clip for the pen though. No way that thing is in the same place after a ride to work in a backpack. Otherwise nearly perfect. However for $3200 I would look at the Vaio Canvas instead. Then you'll be getting a full quad core desktop CPU and still good battery life.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hahaha, well, nothing every stays in the same place in my bag, so one more or less wouldn't be too much of an issue. :laugh:
Sadly the Vaio is as useless as the Surface Pro 3 and 4.
Intel® Iris™ Pro Graphics 5200
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Integrated IntelHD GPU's aren't worth 5 quid, let alone 3000. If I'm going to spend 3000 quid on a tablet/laptop combination, I want to be able to use it as such, and not as a glorified Facebook machine. If I can't game on it, I don't want it.
At least the Surface Book comes with an Intel i7 and a dedicated Nvidia GPU.
You do realize the i7 in the Surface Book is a full QuadCore desktop CPU? The one in the Surface Book is a 6th Gen i7-6650U, the one in the Vaio Canvas is a 4th gen i7-4770HQ.
ShadowLea said:
Hahaha, well, nothing every stays in the same place in my bag, so one more or less wouldn't be too much of an issue. :laugh:
Sadly the Vaio is as useless as the Surface Pro 3 and 4.
Integrated IntelHD GPU's aren't worth 5 quid, let alone 3000. If I'm going to spend 3000 quid on a tablet/laptop combination, I want to be able to use it as such, and not as a glorified Facebook machine. If I can't game on it, I don't want it.
At least the Surface Book comes with an Intel i7 and a dedicated Nvidia GPU.
You do realize the i7 in the Surface Book is a full QuadCore desktop CPU? The one in the Surface Book is a 6th Gen i7-6650U, the one in the Vaio Canvas is a 4th gen i7-4770HQ.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No I didn't realize that, the one I used had the i5 6300U which I pretty sure is a dual core. Also the 6650u is also a dual core I think. I can't afford either right now anyway and I still find my 905 to be great.
The i7 processor in the SurfaceBook is an i7-6600U. It is a dual core CPU, not quad core. At least that's what I've read everywhere. I think it'd be quite a feat to get a desktop class quad core i7 inside a tablet.
bradleysmith said:
The i7 processor in the SurfaceBook is an i7-6600U. It is a dual core CPU, not quad core. At least that's what I've read everywhere. I think it'd be quite a feat to get a desktop class quad core i7 inside a tablet.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Bloody hell, you're right...
http://ark.intel.com/products/88192/Intel-Core-i7-6600U-Processor-4M-Cache-up-to-3_40-GHz said:
# of Cores 2
# of Threads 4
Processor Base Frequency 2.6 GHz
Max Turbo Frequency 3.4 GHz
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well, I'm not paying 3000 quid for a Dualcore. If I wanted 2009 specs, I'd buy a Macbook.
I really want a surface book myself. My biggest thing has been using a stylus that could replace paper and pen. I am a writer and I want something portable. i ahve my gaming system, so i wasnt looking for that. Though, I still wanted something I could play some games with, and maybe even some low settings of higher end games.
From what I have heard the dedicated gpu is a 1gb 900 series. Probably a 950m or so. Though, that is speculation. The 1GB limit is what bugs me. It means a limit on many dx11/12 and physX settings.
I didnt know if the surface pen was wacom or ntrig. They both have their benefits, however, the wacom still works with less lag.
I like Vaio options. They do pretty well. The last one I had was the Sony Vaio flip 15a. It was nice, with a good dedicated GPU. I got a refurbished model for around 800 bucks, with 1TB HDD and i7.
Its up in the air. Without cost being a concern Id just use a notepro and a surfacebook for mobile and my gaming laptop at home mostly.
An equivalent (roughly ) spec mac book pro is cheaper than the surfacebook. I know the mac book isn't a touchscreen device but I think that going higher than Apple's pricing isn't a smart move. Like them or not mac books tend to be sturdy long lasting machines and that hinge on the surfacebook looks like it's begging to be snapped off.
Sent from my SM-P900 using Tapatalk
bradleysmith said:
An equivalent (roughly ) spec mac book pro is cheaper than the surfacebook. I know the mac book isn't a touchscreen device but I think that going higher than Apple's pricing isn't a smart move. Like them or not mac books tend to be sturdy long lasting machines and that hinge on the surfacebook looks like it's begging to be snapped off.
Sent from my SM-P900 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Macbooks are no more durable that any other laptop, they just market it that way. Apple could make people think they are the shiniest most awesome thing on the planet. Hence why they call it the reality distortion field. We also cannot judge a hinge or other part of a product based solely on looks. Who knows, that hinge may outlast every other component.
I also cannot think that comparing a non touchscreen macbook to a surface pro and thinking they are equivalent is really all that equal. You are taking out a couple of the most expensive components. The touch screen and the digitizer, not to mention the pen. Thats like saying "My motorcycle cost less than my car, and its just a couple of wheels difference.".
There is also a need to consider other components, such as the dedicate gpu, the possibility of a quad i7, the rear facing camera, the fact that it can detach and be used as a tablet, The fact that it has higher resolution than the mbp, etc.
Overall, I would say the price difference is just fine. Though, in my opinion they are both overpriced. Apple is always notorious for making high margins on their products. The surface series is also notorious for being high cost. Price is definitely going to be the biggest 'con' to the device.
You're right about comparing the two devices, but it seems that Microsoft do consider the Apple laptops to be a competitor.
Everyone's experience is different but my 2009 Macbook Air still looks and feels new. I've never been able to say that about any other manufacturer's laptops. I thing the Macbook hardware really is top notch (sadly with a price to match!)
bradleysmith said:
You're right about comparing the two devices, but it seems that Microsoft do consider the Apple laptops to be a competitor.
Everyone's experience is different but my 2009 Macbook Air still looks and feels new. I've never been able to say that about any other manufacturer's laptops. I thing the Macbook hardware really is top notch (sadly with a price to match!)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If you don't Game, and as a result don't require heavy duty hardware, then a Macbook will last you about 10-15 years. That's the good part of OS X, it doesn't clutter anywhere near as much as Windows does.
But if you play games (like me) the situation becomes slightly different. (You can't play real Games on a Macbook without running Windows in bootcamp anyway). They just don't run very well on 2 year old hardware, let alone 5.
I'd want to play Dragon Age Inquisition on the tablet, for instance. Today I'm doing it through Splashtop, but that just streams my desktop (it does add controls though). But running the game on an IntelHD? I tried that when the Optimus driver didn't support the game yet. (My Laptop has Nvidia Optimus, so without driver support everything runs on my IntelHD 5000 instead of my GT740M.) The result was, well... terrible. Even the main menu ran at 2fps. :silly:
But the whole issue about videocards is a moot point when the competition is Apple, because Apple always uses IntelHD videocards anyway. :laugh:
I game on a desktop. Gaming laptop is an oxymoron
Sent from my D6603 using Tapatalk
bradleysmith said:
I game on a desktop. Gaming laptop is an oxymoron
Sent from my D6603 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No, it really isn't. :laugh:
Intel i7 - 3630QM 3.4GHz, 6M Cache
12GB DDR 5 RAM
Nvidia Geforce GT 740M 4GB VRAM
1.5TB 7200RPM (I have no use for an SSD, far too small)
17.3" 1080p Matte LED, LEDbacklit keyboard.
You can game perfectly fine on that. Skyrim runs with 253 mods including HD mods on Ultra at a steady 60fps. Dragon Age Inquisition runs on High at 30fps.
You just need to stop shopping in crappy electronics shops, and pick one you can mod. I put the DDR5 in myself, as it came with 8GB DDR3. The GPU could use some upgrading, but I'm not exactly earning a fortune at the moment.
Please tell me how you suggest I game on a desktop computer when I live in two cities half a country apart 50/50 of a week. I'm not lugging a desktop tower onto a train for 5 hours twice a week, thank you very much... :laugh:
Hmmmmm you didn't take any notice of my wink emoji.
Sent from my D6603 using Tapatalk
bradleysmith said:
Hmmmmm you didn't take any notice of my wink emoji.
Sent from my D6603 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sure did, hence all the laughing emojji's Just joking along.
I always find it funny when people talk about the limits of laptops and how you need a desktop for real power.
I see it all the time, and it makes me laugh. Sure, a desktop is cheaper and can definitely be more powerful, but my laptop serves me just fine, too.
I can run most games on ultra settings without much issue.
However, thats the one big thing with a surface for me. I still want to game. If I am not going to be lugging my laptop around, i sill want to be able to play an rts or maybe break out an older game like fallout 3 or call or juarez or civ 5 and play a bit. With the new setup, I think you will be able to do that. The older surfaces could game, but they were being pushed to run games like civ 5. I remember the i7 model was running so hot that it throttled down to the i5 model speed or less, so gamers were just going with the i5.
I hope they took care of heat management here. Its going to be one of the biggest issues when people start pushing those GPUs