Google Takes Aim at Apple with New Nexus 7, Google Play Games and Chromecast

[Oletros]

This new Android OS seems wasting a lot of space on status bars - now there are two. What was the point of adding another status bar on top.

There is just on status bar, the upper one. The other is the soft button bar and has been there since the first device without physical buttons.

 

[kevinof]

ok but it's not really a browser - it's bits of the browser (codec's etc) and this is sitting on top of the chrome os which handles the network stuff.

Be interested to see where they go with this. For $35 it's a bloody good deal.

From https://developers.google.com/cast/



Nevertheless, I agree that they want you to place all your content in the cloud, so they can in one way or other make more money on ADs and in future possibly on paid services.

 

[Elit3]

The Google fanbois tell us that chrome cast brings the Internet to my tv. My tv already has the Internet. Why do I need chrome cast to give me something I already have?

And I wonder what OS your TV runs on?

 

[Grohowiak]

So after 20 pages (I've read them all) I know that:

OMGWTF big bezel and PFFTTLOOSERS Chromecast sucks.

It just proves how big those two devices are.
I just preordered both and will not be getting the new mini that I was waiting for. Why would I anyway?

----------

Really?

They need something or else they will cry.
Just let them be

 

[Mattjeff]

App developers make your apps universal and bam im on it. I just sadly have too much money invested in apps.

 

[Chub]

You're forgetting that the stock market means absolutely nothing. I honestly don't care what rich snobs think about something. When will this fascination over stock prices end?

You obviously don't own any shares...

 

[tablet1425]

Very Nice ....Excellent

 

[samcraig]

The difference being that the latest Samsung will have way more RAM, way more cores and beastly specs on paper and still get outperformed by Apple. Why are you ignoring that fact? Because it doesn't mesh with your argument, perhaps?

Last I read in a few places, the GS3 (not even the GS4) outperformed the iPhone 5 in benchmark testing. How exactly do you mean outperform?

 

[Chub]

Last I read in a few places, the GS3 (not even the GS4) outperformed the iPhone 5 in benchmark testing. How exactly do you mean outperform?

This is probably optimised synthetic benchmarks that don't actually show real world performance. Apple really needs to put a quad core in the 5S to catch up, otherwise they are just going to be left behind.

 

[samcraig]

This is probably optimised synthetic benchmarks that don't actually show real world performance. Apple really needs to put a quad core in the 5S to catch up, otherwise they are just going to be left behind.

I hear you. Personally - it is about specs - but more importantly performance. Which is why I asked PIRG to explain further what he meant by performance and that the iPhone will outperform anything Android. The facts currently say differently. He's entitled to his opinion, of course.

 

[Chub]

I hear you. Personally - it is about specs - but more importantly performance. Which is why I asked PIRG to explain further what he meant by performance and that the iPhone will outperform anything Android. The facts currently say differently. He's entitled to his opinion, of course.

Well I do agree with you as ultimately high end Android phones are undoubtedly ahead of the iPhone 5 at this moment in time.

 

[Taz Mangus]

Chromecast is very easy to buy and try. Anyone knows if you can rooted for XBMC? that will be a homerun!

Yep that is the only reason why I would buy one if I could replace the stock OS with XBMCbuntu. Other then that, Meh, another dust collector.

 

[LordVic]

Yeah, just like with the nexus Q. Oh wait, google screwed everyone over who bought one by discontinuing support less than a year after release.

Fool me once...

Well not me, literally. I was never stupid enough to buy a nexus Q.

Except they technically screwed no-one.

Yes. It was discontinued and after a year the support was dropped

However:

They never sold the product. After a short development and realized they were missing the mark with this product, Google cancelled it before official launch. They then fully refunded anyone's money who pre-ordered it. And then gave everyone who pre-ordered it their ordered copy of the device for free.

so yes. after a year they lost support for a device they were given for free in the first place.

 

[lucas107]

Not sure what everyone is complaining about the side bezel since they are fairly comparable to the mini. Minis are smaller mind you. Top and bottom are bit bigger thou. The pic they chose to show makes the sides look much bigger then they actually are

 

[FrankB1191]

I owned a few Android tablets with 16:9, and can't stand it for anything but video. Scroll, Scroll, Scroll..... I would imagine that the iPhones and iPods have the widescreen ratio because that fits better in your pocket, and not because it's better for reading websites and books. My iPod 5G is narrow enough that I forget which pocket it's in, but I don't use it to read websites much. The iPads' 4:3 is much better suited for that, and I'm happy with what I have. I do have a couple of Samsung Tab 2 7" tabs laying around, and on the rare occasion I pick one up, the aspect ratio makes me want to throw it at the wall.

The asterisk on the Netflix offer might exclude current subscribers (like me), as the same offer came with the Roku box I bought last year.

 

[Renzatic]

Brute force solutions to problems work, sort of.

If the tools aren't available for a more elegant approach, and if the market prefers a checklist of comparative features and specs, or merely lowest cost, then by all means go with your strength. That pretty much defines the Android market.

Apple doesn't fit in that paradigm as they control most of the stack of software and hardware and more so in the future, the SOC. Apple gains much more synergy in its designs than any of the Android OEM's and that is why there has been a single, premium design for the iPhone each year.

Your welcome to tout your specs, but you seem ill prepared to define exactly what the benefits, tradeoffs and compromises are, something that Apple and the OEM's are all forced to do. As an example, more RAM increases power consumption and cost, with penalties that might include a larger battery increasing weight, volume and cost yet again. That pretty much defines how the "phat" phones came about, but also may account for the lack of profitability of most of the Android OEM's sans Samsung, which has a very deep hardware stack to work with.

I dont' know what Apple's iPhone 5S hardware plans are, but based on past performance, it will be a balanced solution that doesn't appeal to everyone.

Keep in mind that when I'm talking about iOS devices and the hardware behind them, I'm mostly focusing on the iPad. The iPhone doesn't need a quad core CPU and a buncha gigarams. Lightness and longer battery life should be the major focus for it, which Apple has done.

...though I wouldn't mind having a 4.5" screen on the thing.

But the iPad. See, when I first got one, I was expecting it mostly to be a "media consumption device". It'd be something I'd watch movies on, play games, surf the internet, and that's about it. The most productive thing I expected to do was maybe take notes and use it as a map while on the road. The more I used it, the more capable I realized it was. With the right software behind it, it could be the go-to device for all kinds of stuff. Editing photos, painting, maybe even digital sculpting. It's practically the perfect form factor for these things. Throw a keyboard in front of it, and it's suddenly a surprisingly decent writing machine. I could easily see it becoming as useful as a laptop for a lot of things.

...but to really do these things well, it needs more hardware. More ram specifically. Right now, it's got a lot of first step apps. Procreate, Art Studio, and Photoshop touch are great little apps, but they could be better if they had more hardware to work with. Same with Pages and other word processors. A little bit of TLC and some extra ram to fall back on, and they could rival their desktop counterparts.

This is why I'd like to see Apple play the specs game a little more. They don't have to go all out, but an extra gig of ram, and a couple of other tweaks could make for a huge difference in capabilities. Capabilities app developers would take advantage of pretty quickly. The overall cost to the iPad would be negligible for Apple. Since they buy everything in massive quantities, I doubt it'd cost them an extra two dollars per device. Battery life probably would take a hit, but it'd be relatively marginal compared to the upsides of having a little extra ram onboard.

Anyway, I could go on, but I'll go ahead and shore it up here. Apple doesn't have to make huge upgrades every generation. Sometimes a tweak to the formula is all they need. But playing the spec game a little more aggressively wouldn't hurt them or us at all.

 

[samcraig]

This is why I'd like to see Apple play the specs game a little more. They don't have to go all out, but an extra gig of ram, and a couple of other tweaks could make for a huge difference in capabilities. Capabilities app developers would take advantage of pretty quickly. The overall cost to the iPad would be negligible for Apple. Since they buy everything in massive quantities, I doubt it'd cost them an extra two dollars per device. Battery life probably would take a hit, but it'd be relatively marginal compared to the upsides of having a little extra ram onboard.

I could link to the posts where I was blasted for even suggesting that the iPad should have a camera (actually 2) for facetime and other applications. I was laughed at and ridiculed. No one would ever need those things on the iPad!!! My argument back was simple - that if one didn't see a use for it - they didn't need to use it. But that doesn't mean that the device shouldn't have the option. There are lots of things on my phones, computers, tablets, etc that I never use. But I wouldn't argue that they shouldn't be there for those that do.

The argument that Apple doesn't NEED to up their specs to compete falls a bit flat for the same reason. No - for a lot of people - the specs are fine. But why not increase them where appropriate for those that do want a more powerful device?

 

[Spooky73]

This has probably been mentioned but in my skimming of 21 pages I didn't see anything mentioning this Chromecast fact:

No battery drain or processing on your mobile device!

What is intriguing about the Chromecast to me is the fact that it does, in fact, take the command from the mobile device and then streams it from the cloud or web directly. While it seems everyone understands that aspect - I'm surprised more here are not excited by the fact that it will free up your mobile device from any battery usage. With AirPlay, you are mirroring the mobile device and content is still streaming to the device. If I want to watch a Netflix movie and launch it from my phone, for example, with CC I can just forward it over to the adaptor and it completely frees up my phone. With AirPlay the movie is running on my phone for 2 hours.

Am I understanding this right?!?

 

[GermanyChris]

Hmmm. There is nothing wrong with the hardware but its no good for me.

It has one big issue, it runs Android which IMHO is such a flawed and poorly thought out OS - and this coming from someone who was originally excited to get a couple of Android phones last year, but who will be selling both of them near Xmas.

Now if they'd put a full Linux distro with touch comparability then we might be talking.

So not for me unfortunately, I'll just get the next full size iPad 5 or whatever it is to be called.

You can do exactly that

https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Nexus7/Installation

 

[samcraig]

This has probably been mentioned but in my skimming of 21 pages I didn't see anything mentioning this Chromecast fact:

No battery drain or processing on your mobile device!

What is intriguing about the Chromecast to me is the fact that it does, in fact, take the command from the mobile device and then streams it from the cloud or web directly. While it seems everyone understands that aspect - I'm surprised more here are not excited by the fact that it will free up your mobile device from any battery usage. With AirPlay, you are mirroring the mobile device and content is still streaming to the device. If I want to watch a Netflix movie and launch it from my phone, for example, with CC I can just forward it over to the adaptor and it completely frees up my phone. With AirPlay the movie is running on my phone for 2 hours.

Am I understanding this right?!?

You understand it completely. But clearly the device is "useless"

 

[pirg]

This has probably been mentioned but in my skimming of 21 pages I didn't see anything mentioning this Chromecast fact:

No battery drain or processing on your mobile device!

What is intriguing about the Chromecast to me is the fact that it does, in fact, take the command from the mobile device and then streams it from the cloud or web directly. While it seems everyone understands that aspect - I'm surprised more here are not excited by the fact that it will free up your mobile device from any battery usage. With AirPlay, you are mirroring the mobile device and content is still streaming to the device. If I want to watch a Netflix movie and launch it from my phone, for example, with CC I can just forward it over to the adaptor and it completely frees up my phone. With AirPlay the movie is running on my phone for 2 hours.

Am I understanding this right?!?

I guess if you don't have a smart tv it makes you one for 35 bucks. If you do have a smart tv, it's not doing anything.

 

[samcraig]

I guess if you don't have a smart tv it makes you one for 35 bucks. If you do have a smart tv, it's not doing anything.

At this point - probably. But we'll see what some app developers come up with in the future. At this time - I have no need for one for reasons I stated at the top of this thread.

 

[Renzatic]

The argument that Apple doesn't NEED to up their specs to compete falls a bit flat for the same reason. No - for a lot of people - the specs are fine. But why not increase them where appropriate for those that do want a more powerful device?

Exactly. You see a lot of people around here play the "it's perfect for what I use it for, you only think you need more" card more often than they should. Or even worse, they'll start talking about the mythical "Average Joe" when talking about why Apple doesn't do this, that, or the other. He's also pretty wishy washy, considering the things he needs and wants happen to coincide with whatever new feature gets introduced in the newest version of the iDevices.

The whole thing is ridiculous. It's ultimately a circular argument that can't be won. Apple doesn't play the specs game, but Apple has the best specs. JUST LOOK AT THE BENCHMARKS! IT'S SO FAST AND PERFECT! APPLE DOES IT AGAIN! Oh, someone else just made something faster? It doesn't matter, the latest iPad is plenty fast enough for Average Joe. Anything more is a pointless spec game. Blah blah blah blah blah.

 

[LordVic]

I guess where I'm confused is what proof you have that higher specs somehow is necessary. Why does apple need higher specs when they outperform all other phones in every tangible test?



Yes that's my point. So again why does apple need better specs? Just cuz?



Well when you put it that way, android just might be taking advantage of it



I think we agree. You just worded it so it looked like apple is lagging behind and needs to catch up. Again, just cuz?

i dont think Renz is makign the claims you are saying. he's just pointing out why claims like that are made.

And to be fair (as some people think i'm a Fandroid myself at times, which i'm not).

It is a gross injustice to any of these devices to make a comparison based on one aspect of the device. If you did a spec comparison one might win over another. if you do an ecosystem comparison, another wins. if you do a UX comparison, it could be purely subjective.

I hate these "this is better than that" blind devotion people pay to a company. I've used just about every platform at least for a limited amount of time. And i can safely say, that User experience will vary based on the user mostly, then secondary the platform/device itself.

The key is to using the device and platform that best suits your needs and wants. if thats apple, Android, Blackberry or even Win8. having blind devotion to one over the other with ignorance of the rest just makes people sound stupid and sheepish

 

[pirg]

Exactly. You see a lot of people around here play the "it's perfect for what I use it for, you only think you need more" card more often than they should. Or even worse, they'll start talking about the mythical "Average Joe" when talking about why Apple doesn't do this, that, or the other. He's also pretty wishy washy, considering the things he needs and wants happen to coincide with whatever new feature gets introduced in the newest version of the iDevices.

The whole thing is ridiculous. It's ultimately a circular argument that can't be won. Apple doesn't play the specs game, but Apple has the best specs. JUST LOOK AT THE BENCHMARKS! IT'S SO FAST AND PERFECT! APPLE DOES IT AGAIN! Oh, someone else just made something faster? It doesn't matter, the latest iPad is plenty fast enough for Average Joe. Anything more is a pointless spec game. Blah blah blah blah blah.

And then we've got the above average Joe's who say IGNORE THE BENCHMARKS, LOOK AT THE QUAD CORE!!! Oh apple is at the top of every benchmark? Who cares, look at the quad core? Ignore the lag, just look at the quad core! Blah blah blah blah blah

Specs mean nothing if your quad core phone and tablet lags and the software is not optimized for the hardware inside it. Pissing contest.

But again...just look at that quad core!