Nexus 10 Reviews Hit the Web as Fourth-Generation iPad Sales Begin

[lilo777]

Originally Posted by gorskiegangsta

I, along with many others, want to use those apps because in most cases they offer a much better experience than the corresponding websites. Android users like to dismiss lack of quality tablet apps as "not essential" and "not a big deal", yet they salivate every time a major app is released for Android tablets. This shows that they do actually care, and with good reason. OEMs need to push software development through partnerships with major app developers so that every new "flagship" Android tablet comes out with an optimized "killer" new app. Android has grown a whole lot, to become a thing of its own, rather than merely an iOS wannabe. Let's hope the software follows suit.

Aren't you hiding something? The truth is that often you can't view those web sites properly because they use Flash which is not available on iOS devices. So HAVE to use an app in this case. And this is one of the reasons ESPN and others had to make special apps for iOS.

----------

Originally Posted by linux2mac

Which is why iPad owns the tablet market hands down. The competition just doesn't get it and may never get it.

That's what they used to say about iPhone. But you are actually not that well informed. "hands down" does not apply here anymore. Last quarter Android tablets reached market share of more than 40% (with iPad dropping below 60%). Give it two more quarters and the situation will look the same way it does for phones.

[Awakener]

Originally Posted by swagi

Errr...you know all the data mining things in iOS? Just as Google collects all your data, Apple does pretty much the same. *hint*

Do a simple search. IMHO Apple has a fraction of the security and privacy issues. Not even in the same league.

[KenAF]

Originally Posted by lilo777

Aren't you hiding something? The truth is that often you can't view those web sites properly because they use Flash which is not available on iOS devices. So HAVE to use an app in this case. And this is one of the reasons ESPN and others had to make special apps for iOS.

A web browser is not a substitute for a tablet app. Apps provide customization not available through company web sites, such as customized screens for your favorite teams and sports, your interests and favorite news categories, your favorite videos, content matching keywords, etc.

Apps aren't just alternate portals to web sites. There are tens of thousands of iOS entertainment, business, education / reference, and productivity apps for the iPad which have nothing to do with a web site. This isn't functionality you can get on Android with a web browser. Many of these apps simply don't exist in Android versions because they don't make sense on smaller screens and there aren't enough users of Android tablets to justify the development expense.

[KenAF]

Another example:

[lilo777]

Originally Posted by KenAF

Another example:

I am not saying that native apps are not necessary. My point was that in many cases they just replace a web site and, because of lack of support for Flash, that was often necessary for iOS devices. Even the app for which you provided snapshots probably is a substitution for a web site. You probably can do everything this app does on your PC using a web browser. Besides, when it comes to a well established companies and really useful features, in many cases tablet optimized Android apps do exist. Here is snapshot of Comcast's app that, I believe, is similar to your example. The snapshot was taken on Samsung Tab 7.7.

[HarryKNN21]

Originally Posted by linux2mac

Which is why iPad owns the tablet market hands down. The competition just doesn't get it and may never get it.

If iPad is supposed to be more useable than Android devices, why do many iPad users jailbreak their devices to make their device so Android alike? So what you mean is a jailbroken iPad is the best while users have to say goodbye to the greatest customer services in the world which is provided by Apple?

[G51989]

Originally Posted by linux2mac

Which is why iPad owns the tablet market hands down. The competition just doesn't get it and may never get it.

We shall see, Windows 8 tablets are real computers, not blown up iPhones, And windows 8 is a real OS, not a phone OS. there is a good chance that in the next 5 years, they'll steal the top spot from apple.

[gorskiegangsta]

Originally Posted by lilo777

Aren't you hiding something? The truth is that...

To call this part of your sentiment presumptuous would be an understatement. Nevertheless, let us ignore this momentarily, for the sake of continuing this conversation like normal, mature human beings.

Originally Posted by lilo777

..often you can't view those web sites properly because they use Flash which is not available on iOS devices. So HAVE to use an app in this case. And this is one of the reasons ESPN and others had to make special apps for iOS.

As for flash. Really, are we still having this conversation in the latter part of 2012? If we are, would you be so kind and explain to me what exact webpage components on sites like ESPN.com are still exclusively flash-based and don't work on iPads? Because I just loaded espn.com on an iPad and everything from player stats/scoreboards widgets and interactive pop up menus, to video works fine.

There's a reason mobile Adobe Flash development has been discontinued. It is because it was bulky, time consuming process which rarely yielded good results. Most android versions of it outright sucked and the remaining portion was nothing more than mediocre.

[swagi]

Originally Posted by Awakener

Do a simple search. IMHO Apple has a fraction of the security and privacy issues. Not even in the same league.

ORLY? I remeber that article here about a government investigation regarding tracking and location services.

Apple data mines you pretty hard. Want examples?

They data mine your media consumption habits. They sell it to you as feature and call it "Genius". To gather even more data they sell you iTunes Match.

Just as Google they anonymously track your device to gather "traffic information" and boast it as feature with "real time traffic in Maps".(you never wondered why your battery won't last that long? It's that every smartphone calls home pretty much often).

Just as Google they track your web surfing habits.

Just as Google they track your every move on the AppStore.

Just like Google they sell Ads (called iAd - and these are not ads, the are a "feature to give you free Apps") and therefore track everything that is tied to the service (because otherwise noone would pay for these ads, you know).

And just like Google the tell you they do it anonymously so your personal information data wouldn't be tied to the data mined from your device.

I don't see how you really find a difference between those both companies. Maybe you should read that EULA again. It's interesting.

Read here: Section 4

Yeah, I forgot. Apple at least offers an opt-out-page. So how many people do you really know, that used this opt-out-page and did it really work?

[PadreQuevedo]

Originally Posted by KylePowers

Wait, what?

Okay, so I didn't read the full article, so maybe that's why I'm confused, but I'd imagine an Android tablet being a lot more capable of replacing a laptop than an iPad

Totally agree. My reaction after reading this was whaaaaat?

I used iPhone for years and now I am a happy Galaxy S3 user. The only Apple product I have now is my awesome MacBook Air.

Can't wait to buy Google Nexus 10 !

----------

Originally Posted by gorskiegangsta

It's not about the crispness of images - it's about the quality of the interface.

Here's an example:

"ESPN Score Center" android app (phone interface scaled up to a tablet-sized display)
Image

"ESPN Score Center" iPad app (made especially, and optimized for, iPad)
Image

This is from a completely biased point of view. We don't have ESPN app in Brazil. So it only matters for Americans.

[tatonka]

Originally Posted by swagi

Yeah, I forgot. Apple at least offers an opt-out-page. So how many people do you really know, that used this opt-out-page and did it really work?

How would you know if it worked or not? I just have to trust Apple to do the right thing here.

I do agree with your other points though. If you are using technology nowadays, I don't think there is a way around all this data mining and tracking. Companies would be crazy to not mine this data.

T.

----------

Originally Posted by PadreQuevedo

]
This is from a completely biased point of view. We don't have ESPN app in Brazil. So it only matters for Americans.

It is just an example, the point it illustrates is that scaling up phone apps to a tablet sized screen is not a good experience, because the layout will be messed up. From all the reviews so far, the lack of spezialized tablet apps is the Nexuses biggest flaw.

[mr.bee]

I wonder how long they will use the "ios has many more apps" excuse. Looking at how many apps i consistently use, it's 5 to 10 or so. So if an app store has 500 k or 5000k, i'm indifferent about that.

[carmenodie]

when the ipad came out in 2010 is was ridiculed all over the web. I remember the trolling on Engadget became so great that Joshua had to shut it down for a few days so we could all cool off.
I could careless about that nexus 10. To me it is a throw away device whose only value to Google is ads! Period. End of.

[the8thark]

Originally Posted by Ryth

Apple is at the intersection of Arts and Technology streets.

The rest of these companies live on Technology street which dead ends.

They just don't 'get' the experience. They are engineering type nerds who are concerned about 'spec' #s vs experience.

If I can deliver an experience with 512MB of RAM and it takes you 1GB, then big deal.

Its like having a car that is 250HP take out a car that is 500HP because the 250HP car is better designed from air flow, to weight, etc.

Excellent example about 250 vs 500 hp.

Why did the Atom get the best time round the Top gear track?
Does not have the most horses in the engine.
Does not have the most advanced features.
Is not the prettiest thing to ever leave the garage.
Etc etc.

But it is very light. Has a very high horse to weight ratio. And no extra stuff you don't need. Hence even though it's specs on paper are not that flash, it can get around the track the fastest.

My point is, other tablets can look better on paper but for numerous reasons can perform worse in the real world, and give a worse user experience. That's why I say the iPads are still the best.

Even if the latest Google OS is great, you have to make sure all your new tablet can access said new OS. I think this fragmentation is the issue. Google need to clamp down and set a few standards android devs and tablet makers have to stick by. Sure that equals a little less open but a better user experience for all.

[janstett]

Originally Posted by Yvan256

Yes we can buy a shell for the Apple products, but it's still a flaw. Once again functionality loses over looks. These products are made to be used, not to be looked at on a display.

Use Invisible Shield, makes iDevices grippier and adds no thickness.

[the8thark]

Originally Posted by nick_elt

Sorry, do you want to see more ipad mini unboxings?

I want to see a new 2012 iMac unboxing when it's released. As it is new box design. I care for the box photos more then the iMac photos. But I don't think this will happen at the moment. Sadly. This place is all tablet crazy at the moment.

----------

Originally Posted by skunnykart

Did they really create the tablet market?

No, the market was already there. Business and Education has been using tablets for years before Apple made the iPad. Apple expanded the tablet market. They didn't create it. Same applies to the smart phone market.

Re-invent? So every time the market leader changes, that is a re-invention of the market?

So business and education were using tablets before the Apple Newton? If so please tell me what those tablets were.

[lilo777]

Originally Posted by gorskiegangsta

As for flash. Really, are we still having this conversation in the latter part of 2012? If we are, would you be so kind and explain to me what exact webpage components on sites like ESPN.com are still exclusively flash-based and don't work on iPads? Because I just loaded espn.com on an iPad and everything from player stats/scoreboards widgets and interactive pop up menus, to video works fine.

There's a reason mobile Adobe Flash development has been discontinued. It is because it was bulky, time consuming process which rarely yielded good results. Most android versions of it outright sucked and the remaining portion was nothing more than mediocre.

I am not arguing for or against Flash. In your statement about ESPN site "still" is the critical word. The fact that ESPN site can now be viewed on iOS devices would be relevant if iPad was released yesterday. It was not. And when it was ESPN site was still using Flash therefore pushing ESPN to develop an app to overcome iOS shortcomings.

[KenAF]

Originally Posted by lilo777

I am not arguing for or against Flash. In your statement about ESPN site "still" is the critical word. The fact that ESPN site can now be viewed on iOS devices would be relevant if iPad was released yesterday. It was not. And when it was ESPN site was still using Flash therefore pushing ESPN to develop an app to overcome iOS shortcomings.

ESPN has been viewable on IOS for quite some time now, maybe the last year?

That said, there are still some sites where the iOS app is needed to gain access to video. CNBC.com is one example.

[Niff Stipples]

Originally Posted by lilo777

I am not saying that native apps are not necessary. My point was that in many cases they just replace a web site and, because of lack of support for Flash . . .

Flash is crap. It hogs and leaks RAM, it sucks CPU cycles needlessly/relentlessly, it creates unnecessary heat and causes cooling fans to run noisily at high speeds, it prematurely discharges batteries in portable devices, resulting in a significant reduction in useable time away from a plug, and de facto undermines the whole point of a battery-powered portable computing device.

Once Flash has loaded into the browser/user session, there is no easy way for the unsophisticated user to regain control of their Flash-saturated hardware without quitting the Flash/browser session and reopening the browser to the former tabs -- a hassle and unnecessary annoyance.

No such problems exist with a properly architected native app that addresses a specific online need/user experience, assuring that the overall user experience remains positive and useful, particularly within the context of the design intents and capabilities of portable/battery-dependent computing devices.


Niffy

[Niff Stipples]

Originally Posted by HarryKNN21

If iPad is supposed to be more useable than Android devices, why do many iPad users jailbreak their devices to make their device so Android alike? So what you mean is a jailbroken iPad is the best while users have to say goodbye to the greatest customer services in the world which is provided by Apple?

The technologically unsophisticated iPad/iPhone/Android USERS just want their device to WORK, without having to deal with the esoteric permutations/multiple flavors rampant in geekdom.

Demographically speaking, how many "Moms and Dads" jailbreak their iDevices? What numeric portion of the overall iDevice user base do they represent, compared to those that choose to jailbreak their iDevice?

Apple is not targeting end-users who wish to jailbreak . . .


Niffy

[nick_elt]

Originally Posted by Niff Stipples

Flash is crap. It hogs and leaks RAM, it sucks CPU cycles needlessly/relentlessly, it creates unnecessary heat and causes cooling fans to run noisily at high speeds, it prematurely discharges batteries in portable devices, resulting in a significant reduction in useable time away from a plug, and de facto undermines the whole point of a battery-powered portable computing device.

Once Flash has loaded into the browser/user session, there is no easy way for the unsophisticated user to regain control of their Flash-saturated hardware without quitting the Flash/browser session and reopening the browser to the former tabs -- a hassle and unnecessary annoyance.

No such problems exist with a properly architected native app that addresses a specific online need/user experience, assuring that the overall user experience remains positive and useful, particularly within the context of the design intents and capabilities of portable/battery-dependent computing devices.


Niffy

Flash runs really well on my phone, even better than on my macbook. No fans in my phone. My battery also lasts longer than my iphone. Your post is simply fanboy crap.

[lilo777]

Originally Posted by KenAF

A web browser is not a substitute for a tablet app. Apps provide customization not available through company web sites, such as customized screens for your favorite teams and sports, your interests and favorite news categories, your favorite videos, content matching keywords, etc.

Apps aren't just alternate portals to web sites. There are tens of thousands of iOS entertainment, business, education / reference, and productivity apps for the iPad which have nothing to do with a web site. This isn't functionality you can get on Android with a web browser. Many of these apps simply don't exist in Android versions because they don't make sense on smaller screens and there aren't enough users of Android tablets to justify the development expense.

It's a valid point but only to a degree. Android is now a predominant mobile OS and developers have to take it seriously. Also, because of the open nature of Android ecosystem, it provides way more opportunities for developers than iOS. Integration of stylus by Samsung is one such example. As far as sketching apps are concerned, nothing will beat Galaxy Note tablets with pressure sensitive pen:



Another contribution from Samsung is the ability to share tablet screen between two applications simultaneously:

[gorskiegangsta]

Originally Posted by PadreQuevedo

This is from a completely biased point of view. We don't have ESPN app in Brazil. So it only matters for Americans.

It was merely an example. There are countless others such as Facebook and Twitter.

Originally Posted by lilo777

I am not arguing for or against Flash. In your statement about ESPN site "still" is the critical word. The fact that ESPN site can now be viewed on iOS devices would be relevant if iPad was released yesterday. It was not. And when it was ESPN site was still using Flash therefore pushing ESPN to develop an app to overcome iOS shortcomings.

This is partially true. Some have developed mobile apps to compensate for support for flash on iOS. However, the reason behind development of these apps is irrelevant to the crux of this argument. The relevant part is that optimized, native apps offer better user experience than the websites and that Android suffers because the lack of these apps. It is because native apps just offer things the websites do not. Some examples being push notifications, offline access, device integration (i.e. GPS, location services, contacts, camera/mic), optimized data synchronization (reduces providers' network load, and your own data usage), etc..

[nick_elt]

Originally Posted by lilo777

It's a valid point but only to a degree. Android is now a predominant mobile OS and developers have to take it seriously. Also, because of the open nature of Android ecosystem, it provides way more opportunities for developers than iOS. Integration of stylus by Samsung is one such example. As far as sketching apps are concerned, nothing will beat Galaxy Note tablets with pressure sensitive pen:

Attachment 374993

Another contribution from Samsung is the ability to share tablet screen between two applications simultaneously:

Attachment 374994

The note 10.1 isn't there yet but this is definitely the future. I'd love my ipad 3 to do some of this.

[lilo777]

Originally Posted by gorskiegangsta

This is partially true. Some have developed mobile apps to compensate for support for flash on iOS. However, the reason behind development of these apps is irrelevant to the crux of this argument. The relevant part is that optimized, native apps offer better user experience than the websites and that Android suffers because the lack of these apps. It is because native apps just offer things the websites do not. Some examples being push notifications, offline access, device integration (i.e. GPS, location services, contacts, camera/mic), optimized data synchronization (reduces providers' network load, and your own data usage), etc..

This might be true for some cases. Obviously native app might provide better experience sometimes but when it comes to news web sites, usually the opposite is true. It's easy for news organization to change the format of the web site. It's much harder for them to update and release the app. Here is an example. This is snapshot of the ESPN web site made on Galaxy 7.7:



The text is too small in portrait (1200x800) but the site works fine in landscape. This should not be an issue on Nexus 10.

The site offers much more features than iPad app.