New iPad resolution gripe - Page 6

One, we're off topic. Two, really,, read my post above yours. Three, you obviously never really used say an ipad, a cloud service like Dropbox and apps due to your interpretations above make it sound way more difficult than it is.

Bottom line, there's no logging on - its all drag and drop and completely automatic and seamless. You then tap a button on your pad of choice and your files are near instantly all in front of you, in the exact file structure you created, ready for access. You can even manage the file structure from any of your PCs or devices at will - you change it on one it changes globally.
Wifi, 3G, 4G, LTE - I'm connected every where I need to be and then some. It's completely easy, efficient and not anywhere near "screwing around". I'll take a cloud service over external storage that I have to carry around and worry about failure or loss any second of the day.

Flash and those few moments when I would like a USB port - I agree with you, and on the price gouging apple memory bit as well. Yes, 32gb jumps in memory should be no more than $30-50 vs the $100 Apple gets. But that's marketing...

Cheers

KJ think you are not reading HIS point.

I go to a client and I need to transfer a lot of data to my portable device. They have never used Drop Box and I cant just dictate that they do or do it on THEIR computer. USB is a treasure in that environment. There are plenty of others but I think that was DC's point and is very valid. As much as I love my ipads there are plenty of times I use my 4.5" Galaxy S II to put the files on MicroSD (using a usb writer on the clients PC).

And Cloud storage is great but Virtual Office Apps are a must. If you think you can do any real work on spreadsheets/documents of any complexity from simple cloud storage you are very mistaken.

True,
It will always come down to the users needs and use/requirements. I don't use my pad to "completely" replace a laptop. My use is more to reference docs, procedures and regulations/technical guidance, documentation etc. In my line of work and the corporations I work with, any form of USB thumb drives, cards, portable hard drives etc are strictly prohibited. If I need something transferred it either happens via email or dedicated secure cloud services.
I may draft a word or PDF doc and/or populate a spreadsheet but beyond that the pad is put down for a full functioning software suite etc. Frustration with a portable device at that point is unavoidable due to size - form/function.. :-)

PS, I did read HIS / DCs point. :-). I was just pointing out that I said the same in a post above. Cloud services aren't the fix all for all. But their ease of use is completely, well,, easy and very effective. Depending on your service however, some mileage may vary. :-)

It's all good

Cheers

If you had used an iOS device, you would understand why it's done this way: applications are sandboxed, and while media has a central storage location, it is stored in a database, rather than apps scanning for files in a directory. (which is slow)

There may have been a race to the bottom with SD card pricing, but high performance flash memory is still comparatively expensive. It may not matter so much when you're taking the odd photo with a point & shoot camera, but when you're trying to do something intensive such as running applications off it, or using a camera that goes through a lot of data (my camera shoots 14MP RAW files at 7fps) cheap flash doesn't cut it.


It sounds like you don't actually want to do anything with these files, but rather use the iPad as a storage device? A USB thumbdrive is far more suited to that.


I think you are confusing cloud storage with cloud apps such as Google Docs. Cloud storage is just a storage location for your documents, you still open them up in whatever application you require.

From a personal point of view, Dropbox makes things significantly easier. There is no manual file transferring. After setting up my account in the Dropbox app on my iPad, other Apps can request to use those credentials, and once they do, files are automatically synced between all my devices. There's no manual "transferring" to be done, they're synced automatically. Using a USB cable to manually copy files back & forth would be a nightmare.

Nope No Confusion ( I actually use PaaS every day). What you are not seeing in my post is that there is no application on the Ipad that can truly allow you to work on any moderately complex document/sheet etc because they are not compatible enough- So Dropbox helps with getting it but what good does that do on a device that cant render/edit it. So while Dropbox is nice Google Docs (or the latest up and coming free service OnLive Desktop - a full function Win 7 Word & Excel virtualized Desktop for your ipad [or in cloud speak SaaS] is a must).

And if I had used an IOS Device? Please take the time to read a post before you make such a ridiculous reply - since I wrote...

"As much as I love my ipads there are plenty of times I use my 4.5" Galaxy S II to put the files on MicroSD (using a usb writer on the clients PC)."

And Sandboxed does not mean they cant transfer internally from a common location (Done all the time! What do you think happens when you get an e-mail with an attachment and you say "Open In"). We want the ability to use usb as a transfer mechanism when Cloud or wifi app transfer is not an option.
And I do want to do something with those files (I write my own custom tablet/WinMo apps that analyze the large data I need to transfer) and what is even funnier is that your own words are making our point. "A USB thumbdrive is far more suited to that" Yes at times if i don't want to use the data right away it is but not if any of the devices is an IOS device since IT DOES NOT SUPPORT USB.

This may be stating the obvious, but it sounds like you want a laptop rather than a tablet. The 11" MacBook Air is only marginally bigger than the iPad, and trying to edit spreadsheetseven simple onesis a horrible experience with a touchscreen.

That said, if it's something you really want to do, you should get one of the Windows 8 tablets whenever they come out, as the ability to run the full desktop Office suite seems to be the main selling point. (it seems like a terrible idea to me, but if you want to carry around a tablet, wireless keyboard & mouse, so be it)

Of course Microsoft may decide to release a version of Office for iOS, but it seems like they may have lost that market alreadymost people have now realised that they don't need anything close to the full functionality of them to get things done and have found alternatives at this point. And as mentioned already, trying to manipulate spreadsheets with a touchscreen is an awful experience.

This does not allow you to edit the original file, it creates a copy in that app's file store that is not linked or referenced to the original in any way. With images, you have the option to add files back to the central file store (Photo Roll) but this is creating another copy.

With images, it's relatively quick & easy to see which one you want, as they're entirely visual and you can see this from a thumbnail.

Once an image is in the Photo Roll, there's no way to delete or modify it, other than through the "Photos" app.

You should be able to see by now, why this wouldn't work at all for documents. It would be a nightmare to try and track changes between versions, and even worse if you have to move that document between several apps, creating a new copy each time.


You complain that you cannot use these files on iOS, but then argue that there should be some way of storing them on the device. If you can't use the files at all (I assume you've tried the Office alternatives that exist) a USB thumbdrive that fits on a keychain seems far better suited to this task than carrying around an iPad and a sync cable.

Chrono I suspect you are not a developer. Managing versions is a large part of any complex project. We don't care about copies (actually we like them in case we need to roll back to them). And funny enough many of the docs/sheets that i cant open correctly on the ipad open and edit just fine on my S2. But Iin the end I am not asking to develop on a tablet (I need at least a 24" screen to be really productive) I am asking to run my apps which many times requires the transfer of large files which is burdened by not supporting USB/micro sd. Now why do I have 2 ipads? becasue they have many other EXCELLENT features (battery life and screen res are the 2 most important to me) but no matter how you spin it not having USB support is a minus.

I know this may be hard for you to comprehend but forgive me if I want to be able to open complex office files AND be able to run apps that process large amounts of client data - Hmm Imagine that expecting it to do more than 1 thing(lol). You sound like several of the applicants i interviewed lately about taking our Insurance E-Commerce site and running it in a tablet and localized PC environment with maximum shared code base. I politely showed them the exit.

What do you do with that Ipad screen rez besides display pictures?

I read on mine. It's far and away the sharpest, most pleasant computer-type reading experience I've ever had -- and I've been using computers since the early 1980s.

How does it scale, web page, anything? I've heard not well.

I guess I don't understand the question. Zoomed in, zoomed out... everything looks stunning. I had the second-gen iPad and have two laptops... none can dream of the text quality of the current iPad.

I guess the smart ass answer is "Look at it".

To try and be more helpful the 2 main improvements for me are: Reading just about anything on it is better and (2) I work a lot in virtualized desktops and with a Win 7 VM I can now set that res much higher so the whole screen is so much more sharper. I hope I find a RDP client to support that high res and then I would have 3 major pluses for it.

I guess you are asking if the content has enough res to look good on the display (because pretty much all devices now a day are fixed pixel displays so they obviously do not scale their res). I guess to a small degree a poor quality source's imperfections are emphasized. What is probably happening is 1) it will look more pixelated and 2) since the text is sharper it appears poor quality images/objects are noticed. Most quality sites this is not a problem and every part of it looks better. Certainly not the ipads fault (we sound like so many who blame their sets when the biggest problem is the SOURCE).

Ahh.... I wish I were that young (Although programming in the 70's was in some way more satisfying than today). But I agree it is the cleanest reading experience.

Jump Desktop was updated with retina support a few days after the new iPad's release. Supports RDP and VNC connections, well worth the money in my opinion.

Having Windows rendered at 2048x1536 on the iPad screen looks amazing.



All the iPad is going to do, is highlight poor quality content. It's not going to make that content any worse than it looks on any other screen, it's just that everything else looks much better now.

Mobile devices have been scaling content for years, and I have been doing the same on the desktop, because most web designers do not design their pages to adapt to high resolution displays. (even at 1080p, a lot of websites only make use of 1/3 of the screen)

Basically your choice is:

1. Use a low resolution, fixed pixel device locked to 100% view, and hope that it is a reasonable size on your display. Text and image quality is all equally poor.
2. Use a high resolution display that can dynamically scale content to fill the screen with the relevant information, and make sure content is legible. Text quality is amazing, but image quality may fall behind in comparison if the content creator didn't put any thought into their design. (there are so many sites using rasterised images for things that should be rendered as text or vectors)

I'll take the latter, where the text (the content that matters) looks amazing, and images range from poor to great, rather than having everything look equally poor.

Agreed. I believe screen size trumps resolution when we're talking about screens of this size. Looking at my Nexus' 4.6" screen vs my wife's tiny IPhone 4S screen is, at least to me, like day and night. It was one of the major reasons I finally gave up on IPhones after owning 3 of them. The lack of 4G was another.

Frankly I'd find it hard to believe that Apple continues with these small screens in future IPhones. Of course I, like many, thought the 4S would sport a larger screen. But hey, it doesn't bother my wife, she loves 'simple'.

As far as ITunes is concerned, don't get me started. One of the worst pieces of software I've ever seen. I even got an Apple 'genius' to pretty much admit that to me during a tech support call.

Software aside, there's no way I'd want one of those Android phones that are rapidly approaching 5″ in size. (Galaxy S3 is 4.8″!)

Some people actually like pocketable phones that don't need two hands to use them.

Apple chose their screen size based on ergonomic design, not any other reason.


Not sure how a smaller screen = simple and poor UI & design choices on Android do not make it more advanced, only more complex.


I think anyone will agree that iTunes is a horrible piece of software. But most people have no need to use it since the iOS 5 update. (my iOS devices haven't been plugged into a computer since the first iOS 5 beta in June 2011)

I, too, have not seen iTunes since iOS 5. I don't miss it either.

As for 4G, I want it but for on-phone use, the reality is the Android browsers with 4G are not yet outbrowsing 3G iPhones. I want 4G for tethered devices. This is really a non-problem. There's a 4G iPhone this fall anyway.

It is not the ONLY reason.

Although true it is a nice size for one handed operation any serious use is much better with 2 hands and then the extra screen size is of tremendous value.

My S2 is more pocketable than my 4 (don't have a 4s anymore because the S2 was better for ME [YMMV]). Its thinner and lighter and is less noticeable in my pocket.

IOS5 is not friendly to my ipad 1st gen - slowed it down considerably even after a complete wipe out and fresh install. Its fine on my newer ipad though and I do love I don't need itunes! However the USB mode of connecting is awesome on my S2.

Rogo - I love you but are you on crack today? I have them both and 4g blows away the 3g iphone browsing (how can you even think its close?).

Update. Just did a small test browsing to weather.com and showing animated radar... total session time 3G on Iphone was 22seconds average download speed 191kbs - S2 and 4G was 8 seconds average 11432kbps. How is that outbrowsing?

I generally avoid crack and other drugs.

Visit a half dozen sites, not one with an animation. Then report back to me what the total time was.

I've read a bunch of reviews and did some in-store tests at Verizon and wasn't impressed that using the web -- on phone -- with 4G was especially different. Obviously, your weather.com experience is different.

I should add that almost any app > almost any HTML-mobile web site at this point and for example I use The Weather Channel app on phone, not weather.com. If that could possibly be faster on 4G than on my iPhone, I don't see how I'd even notice the difference.

Tried weather channel app - Much faster on 4g vs 3g.

Ok- For mobile specific sites text only yeah sure its not a big difference since you are not downloading much but that is a far cry from saying 3g out-browsers 4g. The 4g is as fast on low bandwith text sites and after that everything else is blown away by 4g. It approaches my wifi settings. SO are you insinuating that the iphone 3g is comparable to andriod wifi (whats the difference the speeds many times are comparable). I usually agree with your wisdom so often but here you are cherry picking one web use and not objectively (or scientifically) looking at it.


Update: I should state that I get solid 4g connectivity at home and in work (sprint is on our roof) so even indoors 4g is excellent. at the Cape house 3g from anyone stinks and wifi is a must- 4g is not even a thought down there. So I conclude it does depend on your location.

Ebernazz, agreed it depends on location.

Also, I didn't mean to even imply that 3G outbrowses 4G (and I didn't say that ). What I meant to make clear was that 4G doesn't blow away 3G on browsing. And that's especially true here, where my 3G is pretty excellent. It seems like browser bottlenecks are not much related to bandwidth.

Anyway, I'm still upgrading to a 4G iPhone this fall. Nothing is changing that.

Each to his own, but you should be aware that the nature of ergonomics is that one size does NOT fit everyone. I use my much easier to read Nexus phone no differently in terms of holding it then I did with my prior IPhones. I'd bet the bank that when Apple finally releases a larger screen IPhone, the same people that said the current screen size is perfect, will be the first to say how the new size is so much better. I have nothing against Apple, but I've grown weary of the 'Apple can do no wrong' crowd.

Yes, IOS is easier to use (that's why I said my wife prefers it), but Android does more IMO. It's not unusual for deeper software to also be more complex. But ICS has helped eliminate many of the rough edges of Android.

As far as 4G is concerned, my wife's 4S significantly lags in browser speed to my 4G Nexus. She doesn't care, I do. As i said before, each to his own.

Absolutely. The differences can be dramatic at times. I often tease my wife about it while I'm already reading the page she's still loading. To be fair, there have been times, in poor signal areas, where she could access the web and I couldn't. Granted her pages loaded excruciatingly slowly in those cases, but at least she did have access. Samsung does not have the most sensitive radios, but I still wouldn't trade it for the current IPhone. Give me 4G and a larger screen and I'd consider going back, but after you've become accustomed to these larger screens, it's very tough going back to a smaller display IMO.

Incidentally, the Apple blogs that insist the current screen size is perfect make me nauseous Ken. I mean the current screen size is sufficient for the vast majority of tasks and the high-res display is so good the iPhone screen is still preferable often... But that said, it's a 5-year-old choice of size and it's clear that it needs a size bump.

All rumors, however, point it to bumping to about 4-inch diagonal, which will still be a lot smaller than the 4.8-inch screen on the upcoming Galaxy S III. Of course, as a result, iPhone will still be easier to hold/use and much more pocketable -- and still have the smallest screen among major smartphones.

Yeah, I don't get it Mark. At the very least offer two different sizes: a 4-inch as rumors predict (of corse these rumors have been notoriously inaccurate in the past) and one more competitive with where the rest of the cellphone world is going. There's a huge and growing market for these larger screens. It might be enough to get me back if it were coupled with 4G.

In terms of pocketable, I find very little difference between throwing my Nexus in my pocket or an IPhone. Certainly not enough to warrant a decision based on that IMO.

Sounds like you have very slow 3G access. I get about 3-4 mbps here, and I don't have great coverage. (no 4G here, and the proposed network is incompatible with existing devices)

For most phone-related tasks, I can't see there being much difference between 4mbps and 11mbps. Most apps aren't pulling down huge amounts of data.

Page rendering times seem to be more of an issue than bandwidth in my experience. (somewhere that Android seems to fall behind, even on the same WiFi connection in my experience)

Now if you're talking about using an iPad or tethering, then the additional bandwidth can make a difference.


Please explain what you mean by "serious use." I was under the impression that the main driving factor for these larger screen sizes on Android was not popularity, but simply because Android manufacturers keep trying to one-up each other, and because the OS itself doesn't handle resolution scaling well at all. (higher resolutions tend to require larger screens with Android)


I won't disagree that reading a lot of text would be easier on a larger screen, but using the device one-handed seems to be an issue with most Android devices, and I have large hands.

But a phone is supposed to be a portable device for me. Any by portable, I don't mean "PS Vita with a 5" OLED screen that can be carried around in a bag" portable, I mean fits in your pocket and can be used with one hand.



That just looks ridiculous to me.


Could you go into detail about what you can do with Android that you can't on iOS? I'm genuinely curious, as a friend of mine was saying the same thing recently (he has an S2 and an iPod touch) and he couldn't come up with any examples.

It seemed more to do with the fact that he's a programmer, and didn't like the idea of iOS being "simple", rather than there actually being issues with it. Programmersat least the ones I knowseem to ignore UI design, or actually prefer a convoluted UI rather than something that's streamlined and nice to look at (which does not mean it's lacking in features) because it makes them feel smart when they figure it out.

Just because something is easy to use, and user-friendly, does not mean it's "simple".

The 4.6" screen Nexus fits very easily into my pocket. No real difference between it and the iPhone. I can't imagine pockets so small that it would be an issue. I just see no reason to not have more screen real-estate. The phones are virtually the same weight too, so 'portability' is no argument at all.

As far as what you can do with an Android that you can't do with an IPhone, look no further than the customization of your screens. I can use thousands of gorgeous, informative widgets that I can't on the IPhone. That alone makes the phone experience far more engaging. I've grown very bored of IOS. Been there, done that.

"Bored" is a good word for it..
I love my Apple devices and don't mind iOS yet they do need either customization or a significant update to the "screen" / desktop etc.