iPhone, iPad Games, Apps, Reviews, News Wed, 04 Feb 2015 21:56:43 +0000 hourly 1 By: TouchReviews Tue, 08 Mar 2011 14:58:00 +0000 Am sure you are aware of the fact that Apple worked on the iPad before the original iPhone which was launched in 2007.

So, to say that iOS was not developed for tablets would be incorrect.

In the end, we don’t get impressed just with tech specs. It’s the execution, user experience and the ecosystem which makes a product successful.

If you isolate just the tech specs and talk about more RAM and more megapixels then maybe you have a point.

But, if you view Stephen’s opinion while keeping in mind what the iPad already does for you then it just makes sense.

Stephen is an iOS developer too so he knows what he is talking about when he is writing about the future of mobile gaming on tablets.

When a user buys an iPad, they are getting tech which has been tried and tested by millions of customers, have access to more than 65,000 apps and a developer community which is more than happy to support iOS than any other platform.

We strongly believe in presenting balanced opinion and if Xoom in future can do what the iPad has already done then we would be sure to highlight it. I agree Xoom is certainly a good competition for Apple’s iPad but it still needs to mature further. ^Ravin

]]> By: Anonymous Tue, 08 Mar 2011 14:28:00 +0000 Hardly my intention, if true. I’m just trying to convince you to offer a more balanced portrayal in the future.

]]> By: Anonymous Tue, 08 Mar 2011 14:19:00 +0000 You’ve changed my mind.
I’m selling all my iOS gear and buying a Xoom.

]]> By: Anonymous Tue, 08 Mar 2011 14:15:00 +0000 That is exactly my point, you are making grandiose statements that have no basis in fact. At most the iPad 2 can be said to have similar tech as the Xoom, and that’s being generous. There is simply no way the iPad 2 dual-core CPU can be significantly better than the Xoom dual-core CPU, not in the price range of either device. And even if you ignore the half as much RAM the iPad 2 has, camera quality is no where near accurate enough for the level of technology you are claiming. And since you mention sound the Xoom has stereo speakers built in, the iPad 2 is still believed to have mono sound, but let’s assume they up that to stereo as well, you’re still looking at on-par with the Xoom, not ahead of it.

And for software, if iOS came out in April 2010, how can it be “2 years ahead” of Android? Even if you go back to the earliest versions of either OS (which would be silly since back then they were aiming both OS’s at phones, not tablets) there still isn’t a 2 year gap between OS’s. And I should also point out that iOS isn’t specifically built for a tablet, it’s a cross product OS, whereas Honeycomb 3.0 is built specifically for tablets, which by definition means Honeycomb would be better attuned to a tablet than iOS.

]]> By: Anonymous Tue, 08 Mar 2011 02:51:00 +0000 I am confused. What forgone conclusion?

This opinion piece is about the leap for mobile gaming that the iPad 2 offers.
For mobile gaming to work devices need to cover a lot of bases. Not least great visuals and sound, and a battery life which can do more than a 10 minute bus ride. To date there is no tablet out there that offers that same balance.

So my overriding opinion, and it is only my opinion, is that the iPad 2 is streets ahead of the competition when looked at as an entire package; HW, SW and OS. :)

]]> By: TouchReviews Mon, 07 Mar 2011 23:19:00 +0000 Your comment was linking to an external site so it was automatically moderated. We have approved your comment.

There is no reason for us to censor your comments for making valid arguments.

Please note: Comments with external links might take a while to appear as they go through manual approval process.

]]> By: TouchReviews Mon, 07 Mar 2011 23:10:00 +0000 @AngryHumanoid your comment was linking to an external site so it was automatically moderated. We have approved your comment.

There is no reason for us to censor your comments for making valid arguments.

Please note: Comments with external links might take a while to appear as they go through manual approval process.

]]> By: Anonymous Mon, 07 Mar 2011 20:51:00 +0000 Where is the response from this morning that I posted? Are you going to censor me for making valid arguments?

]]> By: Anonymous Mon, 07 Mar 2011 15:28:00 +0000 Wow, you just entirely ripped off this review in your reply:

And it’s interesting to me that the same website had a few negative things to say when the iPad came out, largely due to only being able to run one program at a time, and not being able to play online video. In other words, features that were brought on line after it had been released.

And I can cherry pick good / bad comments too:

“Android is a much more open, customizable system than iOS”

“Honeycomb and the Xoom are spectacular”

“In conjunction with Android 3.0, the XOOM rivaled the iPad on any given day”

“The Honeycomb OS is highly intuitive”

“Overall, Android Honeycomb was the sexiest, most highly functioning Android OS to date”

“The iPad 2 is largely an incremental improvement over the original”

“…no plans to purchase an iPad because I don’t want to buy a product that is intentionally closed so that I can only buy manufacturer-approved applications”

About iPad2: “seems like a nice iteration, but nothing amazing”

The point is, you wrote this article with a forgone conclusion in mind. All I’m asking for is a bit of balanced reporting, please.

]]> By: Anonymous Mon, 07 Mar 2011 12:39:00 +0000 Not sure which reviews you are reading. But here are the typical quotes from the reviews I am reading…

“The software is not particularly stable or robust”

“Users have to rely on the MTP protocol to manage media on the device”

“The built-in e-mail client has extremely poor protocol support”

“Very few websites handle the Honeycomb browser’s User-Agent string correctly”

“The browser’s support for advanced CSS3 features lags behind Safari’s”

“Key features like Flash and the microSD slot don’t work at launch”

I’d say I am being fairly generous with my initial comments. :)

My POV is two fold.

1. The hardware is not as refined as the iPad’s. By that I mean focussed on being a light-weight power-efficient device with its designated OS. i.e. The hardware and software are designed in concert. So it may be a fire breathing monster. But it is a crippled one.

2. It is generally accepted (and simply commons sense) that both Android (for tablets) and Windows Phone 7 are *at least* 2 years behind iOS – simply because they were later to the market.

]]> By: AngryHumanoid Mon, 07 Mar 2011 12:33:00 +0000 I’m not sure where you’re getting your information from. CNET’s testing shows the Xoom battery life is second to the iPad, true, but both are ahead of all other tablets. That puts both of them at the top of the industry, so claiming that equals “very lacklustre battery life” is rather misleading.
And the 2 years behind thing sounds like a rather random thing to say, since the reviews I’m reading praise the way the Xoom handles emails, notifications, switching between apps, and has customizable widgets that iOS lacks. You can argue that they both other different features which different people might prefer, but again, “2 years behind” is a misleading statement.

]]> By: Anonymous Mon, 07 Mar 2011 08:40:00 +0000 Unfortunately the general consensus is that the Zoom’s Android OS is still two years behind iOS. And as you point out yourself has been shipped incomplete. On top of that all of the features that have been crammed into the Zoom in a rushed effort to get to market means that the hardware and software design give the Zoom a very lacklustre battery life.

It’s all very well having all the bells and whistles. But the whole package needs to work. Which is why very often “less is more” with Apple, and “more is more” doesn’t necessarily hold true for rushed high spec hardware which is not developed as a cohesive marriage between OS and HW. :)

]]> By: Anonymous Mon, 07 Mar 2011 08:29:00 +0000 You could be correct. Assuming the specs are accurate, then the NGP will pretty much always need to be connected to a power outlet if it uses all of that processing power. Either that or you’ll need a container load of batteries in your backpack – as well as an iPhone and a laptop to give you the same functionality of the iPad. :)

]]> By: Anonymous Mon, 07 Mar 2011 08:26:00 +0000 Actually, all of the things I “claim” the iPad 2 can do can already be done on current iOS hardware – including the Kinect style motion analysis in real time.

On the A5, even with the limited knowledge we have of the exact spec., the difference is we have a minimum of 2 times the overall processing power on both the CPU and GPU sides of the SoC. That turns things that have been developed as more or less proof of concepts on current hardware into reality on this next iteration.

]]> By: Tommyxx516 Sat, 05 Mar 2011 21:45:00 +0000 “complex software features like facial analysis, speech processing, and motion controls similar to that of the Microsoft Kinect – except using the cameras and raw processing power of just your iPad 2!”
Considering you know very little about the A5 chip, you were short of claiming it can also levitate. No HD display, 1 megapixel vga webcam, 512 megs ram… Yeah, i don’t think so. Maybe you’re thinking about Ipad5?

]]> By: Lame Fri, 04 Mar 2011 22:25:00 +0000 Hey nerd do your research n get rape

]]> By: Kool Fri, 04 Mar 2011 22:24:00 +0000 And also the ipad 2 doesnt have or almost the same graphic as the ps3. Ngp is 4-core so there no way the lame- pad can compete

]]> By: Anonymous Fri, 04 Mar 2011 20:35:00 +0000 Interesting that you said the iPad 2 has better tech than anything the competition could produce this year, because the Xoom is already out with double the RAM, and an almost identical dual-core CPU. And a higher resolution. And a built in HDMI port. And 2 better cameras. And a (soon to be enabled) flash card drive. And a multitude of additional sensors than what the iPad 2 has.