# Opinions - IPad 2 or 3?



## Mallus (Aug 7, 2012)

I'm in the market for a tablet, primarily for gaming PDFs, comics, and reference books. I've already own an iPhone 4s, which I think is swell, but e-reader wise, it's only practical for novels. 

We already have an iPad 2 in our house -- my wife's. She uses it all the time. While I do notice the difference between its screen and my phone's, it still seems like a nice display. So...

Is the Retina display worth the extra money? 

Don't some sources look _worse_ on it?

Anyone have issues with the latest version -- heat, battery drain, screen tint problems, ie the ones currently being mooted on the tech forums? 

Since I already own a number of universal apps, I'm not seriously considering Android units. Besides, after many years of not owning a single Apple product, I find, now, that I quite like them.


----------



## Janx (Aug 7, 2012)

good questions.  I have an iPad 1, iPhone 4 and my wife has an iPhone 4s.

At home, I'd rather use the iPad than the iPhone.  Bigger screen for looking up Wiki stuff while playing a game, etc.

I tend to leave my iPad at home when I'm out and about, as I have an iPhone so I have emergency lookups solved.

Screen-wise, the iPad 1 is good enough, so iPad 2 or 3 is better enough.

However, Apple has an expiring generational support schedule.  Meaning, my iPad is about to fall of the supported hardware kist for the newer versions of iOS.

That'll mean less apps I can run when they get upgraded to support iOS6 and only iOS 6.

That doesn't make an older model worthless, but it does diminish its potential usefulness as new apps come out.

This is the conundrum you'll face with the iPad 2 vs. iPad 3, which is why I babbled so long about the iPad 1.  If my iPad 1 is falling off the ladder this coming spring, the iPad 2 will be falling off a year later.

Get the newest model you can, for the longest supported lifespan of the device.

That's my generic iThing advice, based on my experience with the products, and my experience working in the tech industry.

For your case specifically, you have an iPad 2.  why spend more money?  The new screen will probably look nice, but its not such a game changer to warrant a single generation jump.  Wait'll the iPad 4.


----------



## Hand of Evil (Aug 7, 2012)

Retina display is nice, very nice and the improvement in the graphic card make it fast painting the screen.  The you have 4G LTE, when used with Wi-Fi makes for great tablet BUT all-in-all not worth the jump from an iPad 2 to the 3.  If it was an iPad 1, yes but the 2 has a smaller form factor (thiner & lighter) does not have the heat issue due to the graphic card and really doee everything the 3 does, plus by next year you may see another model.


----------



## Mallus (Aug 7, 2012)

Janx said:


> For your case specifically, you have an iPad 2.  why spend more money?



Heh... I've got _nada_, tablet-wise. While our asset-type assets are jointly held, the iPad in our home belongs solely to my wife!



Hand of Evil said:


> ... BUT all-in-all not worth the jump from an iPad 2 to the 3.  If it was an iPad 1, yes but the 2 has a smaller form factor (thiner & lighter) does not have the heat issue due to the graphic card and really doee everything the 3 does, plus by next year you may see another model.



I'm leaning toward the 2. But to be clear, I'm not upgrading. I'll be a first time iPad buyer.


----------



## Hand of Evil (Aug 7, 2012)

Mallus said:


> Heh... I've got _nada_, tablet-wise. While our asset-type assets are jointly held, the iPad in our home belongs solely to my wife!
> 
> 
> I'm leaning toward the 2. But to be clear, I'm not upgrading. I'll be a first time iPad buyer.



Then, only if money is the issue, get the 2, if no issue, get the 3, always get the latest and great with tech.


----------



## Mallus (Aug 8, 2012)

Hand of Evil said:


> ... always get the latest and great with tech.



That's always sound advice, though I was kinda hoping some iPad 3 owners would chime in with their hands-on experiences. Reasons not the get the latest and greatest that aren't price related.


----------



## Hand of Evil (Aug 8, 2012)

Mallus said:


> That's always sound advice, though I was kinda hoping some iPad 3 owners would chime in with their hands-on experiences. Reasons not the get the latest and greatest that aren't price related.




I have an iPad1 (personal) but work with iPad2 and iPad3, managing 80+ units - the biggest thing about the iPad3 (other than its display) is that it is 4G LTE, if you are going to be using wi-fi, you can take that out and all you are left with is the display (it is a good display).


----------



## Riley (Aug 8, 2012)

If you think the iPad 1 screen looks great, and have no issues with reading small text on the iPad 1, then you should be happy with the iPad 2.  (It has the same screen.)

If you look at the iPad 1 screen, and think that reading blocky small text on it is hard on your eyes, then pay the extras $$ for the iPad 3.  Personally, I passed up both the iPad 1 & 2 because I thought that the DDI pdfs (and other small text documents) looked terrible on them.  I think they look great on the iPad 3.


----------



## Mallus (Aug 8, 2012)

Hand of Evil said:


> ... managing 80+ units - the biggest thing about the iPad3 (other than its display) is that it is 4G LTE, if you are going to be using wi-fi, you can take that out and all you are left with is the display (it is a good display).



Thanks!



Riley said:


> Personally, I passed up both the iPad 1 & 2 because I thought that the DDI pdfs (and other small text documents) looked terrible on them.  I think they look great on the iPad 3.



So these are PDFs that weren't made with the Retina display pixel density in mind? That's what I wanted confirmation of -- I didn't want to buy an iPad 3 only to find the majority of the documents I intended to read on it would look better on the prior version. 

(like SD television on an HDTV with bad up-scaling). 

And thanks, too.


----------



## JRRNeiklot (Aug 9, 2012)

Android ftw.


----------



## Alan Shutko (Aug 9, 2012)

Mallus said:


> So these are PDFs that weren't made with the Retina display pixel density in mind? That's what I wanted confirmation of -- I didn't want to buy an iPad 3 only to find the majority of the documents I intended to read on it would look better on the prior version.




PDFs come in two varieties: the ones which are simply scanned pages, usually somewhere around 100-200 DPI, and the ones with normal fonts for the text.

Neither one cares about the resolution of the screen, and both of them are higher resolution than the iPad 1/2 screen.  Both of them will look better on retina, and the ones with fonts as text (pretty much anything except the original TSR PDFs) will look great on Retina.

Trust me, anything that was ever intended to be printed will look great on retina.


----------



## Mallus (Aug 9, 2012)

JRRNeiklot said:


> Android ftw.



There's one in every crowd... .

But I'll bite... even though the odds are strongly in favor of me sticking with Apple. 

What are the advantages of an Android tablet? Why buy one over an iPad (and which one -- Android is a fairly dilute brand). 

My experience w/Android devices is limited to a little mucking around with friends' phones. They seem quite nice, but I prefer the UI on my iPhone. 



Alan Shutko said:


> Trust me, anything that was ever intended to be printed will look great on retina.



Thanks for the info!


----------



## JRRNeiklot (Aug 10, 2012)

I have little experience with the Ipad, but personally, I don't like the Itunes interface being forced upon me.  With Android, I've been able to easily run all kinds of emulators and even interface a wiimote to play games.  I've even seen Quake 3 play on an Android.   I'm sure that's possible with the Ipad as well, but probably not without jumping through hoops.


----------



## IronWolf (Aug 10, 2012)

JRRNeiklot said:


> I have little experience with the Ipad, but personally, I don't like the Itunes interface being forced upon me.




While iTunes is not great, I almost never have to use it. I used it to setup the iPad initially (not even sure you have to do that with the new generation iPads as I think they were trying to remove that step) and have probably only connected it back to that PC a handful of times in over a year or so. 

The iPad can do over-the-air updates now and Dropbox lets me get any file I care about to the iPad without the need to connect. I do tend to connect for a local backup before an OS update, but really it is just connect, let iTunes open and automatically do its sync.


----------



## Mallus (Aug 11, 2012)

JRRNeiklot said:


> I have little experience with the Ipad, but personally, I don't like the Itunes interface being forced upon me.



I hear you. iTunes should win an award for longest running, consistently terrible application. But you don't need it anymore. Cloud storage solutions like Dropbox make file transfer a snap, and iOS updates are now handled over-the-air.

I wouldn't put music on my iPad, so I doubt I'd use iTunes at all. 



> With Android, I've been able to easily run all kinds of emulators and even interface a wiimote to play games.  I've even seen Quake 3 play on an Android.   I'm sure that's possible with the Ipad as well, but probably not without jumping through hoops.



While that does sound kinda cool, it's not the kind thing I'm into anymore. I just want to pick up a device and use it, as is. 

Why I haven't even jailbroken my iPhone (and yeah, it's easy to do).


----------



## Janx (Aug 11, 2012)

Mallus's description fits my usage pattern.

Music  goes on the iPhone, where I might get to listen to it in the car.

movies go on the iPad, where I might get to watch it on the plane.


I don't dock to iTunes, ever since iOS5, and rarely before that.

FPS games like Quake generally suck on touch screen devices or devices lacking 2 thumb sticks (looking at you PSP1).

While I'm sure Android is the right choice for some folks, iOS works for me.  Android was too cumbersome in my opinion (and I write software for a living, so I know a thing or two about user interfaces).  Am I missing out on some features on iOS?  Sure, but there's a thread about that somewhere else.

get the iPad3 and you'll be happy and able to use all your iOS content.

Just be sure to use the same iTunes account for the App store/music store.

Use seperate email accounts for iCloud and Game Center.  One iCloud account per device.  one Game Center account per user.

That'll optimize your disk space on the cloud, and access to your purchases for your family.


It also wouldn't hurt to share the iPads.  I let my wife use my iPad.  She reads her knitting patterns on it and plays the games.


----------



## Plane Sailing (Aug 14, 2012)

Alan Shutko said:


> Trust me, anything that was ever intended to be printed will look great on retina.




I'm sorry but that just isn't right. It was a major point of contention when it was released because many (most?) newsstand magazines looked rubbish on retina screen - an artefact of publishing related to font licensing. These weren't PDF files so might not be germane to the original question - but it does highlight that there is (or certainly was) published stuff that was worse on retina. 

Cheers


----------



## Alan Shutko (Aug 15, 2012)

Plane Sailing said:


> I'm sorry but that just isn't right. It was a major point of contention when it was released because many (most?) newsstand magazines looked rubbish on retina screen - an artefact of publishing related to font licensing. These weren't PDF files so might not be germane to the original question - but it does highlight that there is (or certainly was) published stuff that was worse on retina.




You make a good point.  iPad versions of various magazines shipped iPad-sized JPEGs to the app, and those looked terrible. If you had a PDF that intended to be printed, it would have been ok.

Incidentally, Adobe is changing their digital editions product to use pdf behind the scenes for exactly this reason.


----------



## Umbran (Aug 15, 2012)

JRRNeiklot said:


> Android ftw.






Mallus said:


> There's one in every crowd... .
> 
> But I'll bite... even though the odds are strongly in favor of me sticking with Apple.
> 
> What are the advantages of an Android tablet? Why buy one over an iPad (and which one -- Android is a fairly dilute brand).




Rumor has it that the Microsoft's "Surface" tablet (running Win8) is going to debut in October with an entry price of a whole whopping $200.


----------



## Mallus (Aug 15, 2012)

Umbran said:


> Rumor has it that the Microsoft's "Surface" tablet (running Win8) is going to debut in October with an entry price of a whole whopping $200.



What do you think the odds are of the MS tablet gaining purchase --pun unintentional!-- in the marketplace?


----------



## Janx (Aug 15, 2012)

Umbran said:


> Rumor has it that the Microsoft's "Surface" tablet (running Win8) is going to debut in October with an entry price of a whole whopping $200.




wow, that's really cheap and hard to believe, but MS is probably the company to pull off eating the loss.


Not to fuel the Android vs. iOS argument, but I saw an interesting viewpoint a few months back at by a presenter.  He was just raving about switching to a new WinMo phone.  Don't know what model, but he was talking about the OS features.  How seemless it integrated with his music library, and the dashboard made more sense.

While MS seems to be a bit player in the smart phone business, they are more likely to put out an OS with a solid look and feel to compete with Apple than Android.  

Android scored some high marks on UI improvements in Jelly Bean, but it still reviews as a total experience designed by a bunch of schizophrenic bi-polar bears flipping bits at the Waffle House.  It's inconsistent, has no UI design bible that anybody has to follow.  Has more settings and adjustments to make than should be necessary.  as one reviewer put it, the fix for bad software should not be to add more software.  While it's great that you can install a third party app to "fix" a shortcoming, the OS itself probably shouldn't have had that shortcoming.

I've drifted off topic. Sorry.  Android could do well.  It sells great.  But I feel it really needs enforcement of standards to make it as smooth as the other OSes.  Otherwise, MS will sneak up behind and take its lunch money, because MS is pretty good at maintaining standards on their platforms.

In other news, has Mallus acctually made his purchase yet?


----------



## Mallus (Aug 15, 2012)

Janx said:


> In other news, has Mallus acctually made his purchase yet?



Not yet, though I'm pretty sure I'm going with the base model iPad 3. 

I'm tempted to swing out to Best Buy during lunch --ie in about 5 minutes-- but I'm going out for our anniversary tonight w/my wife. I'm half-seriously afraid if I bought one this afternoon I'd be all distracted and fidgety during what promises to be a lovely dinner at the tapas joint owned by Iron Chef Jose Garces! 

Maybe tomorrow would be better... 

re: Android UI - I played around with my buddy's Google Nexus phone at lunch last Sat. Pure, current Android experience, no extra UI layer slapped on by the carrier. In the words of Mr. Horse, no sir, I don't like it.


----------



## Umbran (Aug 15, 2012)

Janx said:


> wow, that's really cheap and hard to believe, but MS is probably the company to pull off eating the loss.




That is the suggestion, yes.  Low price on a basic model to produce market penetration quickly.




> ... but it still reviews as a total experience designed by a bunch of schizophrenic bi-polar bears flipping bits at the Waffle House.




Okay.  That, if nothing else, is an evocative phrase.  Kudos!




Mallus said:


> ... I'd be all distracted and fidgety during what promises to be a lovely dinner at the tapas joint owned by Iron Chef Jose Garces!




Ooh.  That should be tasty!


----------



## Janx (Aug 15, 2012)

Umbran said:


> Okay.  That, if nothing else, is an evocative phrase.  Kudos!




Yeah, I kinda overstated things there, but it was funny to write, and I've been wanting to use my newest Care Bear "Bi-Polar Bear" joke for some time.

Android is a perfectly fine OS that gets the job done.  I think it should be better, but that's mostly a UI difference of opinion.  If companies would stop locking down ideas in patents and law suits, maybe it would be easier for both OSes to incoporate the best ideas for better products all around.


----------



## Asatru (Aug 18, 2012)

Now granted I'm not a fan of walled gardens to begin with (much rather have an open air garden).  I would say first question is what are you going to use the device for?  Because buying an Apple product MAY NOT be the best thing for YOU.  Find out what does the things you want it to do and then find the best product for the job if it turns out to be Andriod OS or iOS or even something else just do the research before you decide to spend 300+ Dollars on something.  That way you are going to be FAR less prone to "buyers remorse".

I hope some insight was provided and whatever you choose make sure you enjoy the product otherwise there isn't going to be a positive ROI (return on investment).


----------



## Jupp (Aug 18, 2012)

I was in the same situation a few months ago when I was looking for a tablet. In the end I decided against an iPad because I felt that a Droid/iOS tablet would be too limiting for me. You are bound to an ecosystem like Google Play and iTunes so if an app is not there to do what you want then you are basically screwed. Not only that but also the majority of the apps we have at the moment are not really meant for tablets, or at least are not designed for them specifically. The other thing is that iPads are ridiculously expensive for what they can provide in terms of features and flexibility. 

All the above has in the end led me to buy a tablet PC with Windows 7 installed on it. The one I bought was the Samsung Series 7 Slate. And basically I would not want to trade it back for any other kind of table on the market at the moment. It can do everything an iPad can, has about the same size (bit bigger actually) and is in the sub 1 kilogram category. Additionally you have all the applications and tools at your disposal that you would expect on a standard desktop PC, with the addition that you have a pressure sensitive pen and a touch panel with finger swipe functionality. 

For example, I also run our D&D sessions with the Slate connected to a HD LED TV with maptool, PDF reader, browser with D20SRD and Excel open at the same time (something you can't do with iOS or droid tablets)

I agree that Windows tablets are expensive (but not that much) but what you get back in versatility still makes the Windows based tablet a winner, at least in my book.

Hope that helped a tad.


----------



## Umbran (Aug 18, 2012)

Jupp said:


> I agree that Windows tablets are expensive (but not that much) but what you get back in versatility still makes the Windows based tablet a winner, at least in my book.




This is part of what I wonder about for the Win8 tablet.  While MS seems about to do something *dumb* for Win8 (not allowing one to permanently turn off the Metro interface), it does look like they've grasped onto a concept - the idea that going forward, people will just have their tablet as their PC.  The hardware's starting to get to the point where you can do real productivity with it, if you extend the input to a real keyboard.


----------



## Jupp (Aug 18, 2012)

I think you are right that the different kinds of hardware (phones, TVs, tablets, appliances) are starting to merge into one kind of device from where you can do all the things you need and want to do. Though at the moment we are in some kind of transition phase that make some kind of things kinda awkward to use.

If you look at Windows 8 then you can see that it is clearly designed for tables and other touch controlled devices. But Windows 8 really fails at being cool to use with the standard mouse/keyboard combo. I've tested Win 8 since first beta and it always started to go downhill as soon as you tried to use it with mouse/keyboard. It was great to use on the Samsung tablet though, but still this conversion to a tablet centric OS is  a hard step. You basically change your way of working of the last 20 years and are confronted with a new way to control an operating system.

Microsoft is on the right track but it seems the user is not yet ready to accept the change. But someone always have to make the first step.

This is also the reason I still have Win 7 installed on the Slate. Old habits die hard and it is hard to convert to the a new religion.


----------



## Umbran (Aug 19, 2012)

Jupp said:


> If you look at Windows 8 then you can see that it is clearly designed for tables and other touch controlled devices. But Windows 8 really fails at being cool to use with the standard mouse/keyboard combo.




Are you sure that's the nature of Win 8, or just the Metro interface?

It makes seven kinds of sense to me to have two different interaction modes for such a device.


----------



## Mallus (Aug 19, 2012)

Umbran said:


> Ooh.  That should be tasty!



It was! We both got the chef's tasting menu and it was a ridiculous number of delicious small plates (I believe it was the first time I've had Iberico ham). If you're ever in Philadelphia, I heartily recommend eating at Amada. 



Asatru said:


> Now granted I'm not a fan of walled gardens to begin with (much rather have an open air garden).



Walled gardens don't bother me, so long as they're nice inside.



Jupp said:


> IThe one I bought was the Samsung Series 7 Slate.



That's an interesting piece of hardware I wasn't aware of - thanks. But I'm looking for a lightweight media consumption device, not something to do real work on (no more than light note-taking during a gaming session). With that Samsung I'd be paying over twice the price of an iPad for features I don't want/need -- or are there cheaper models? The ones I saw on Amazon stated over $1000.


----------



## Janx (Aug 19, 2012)

Umbran said:


> Are you sure that's the nature of Win 8, or just the Metro interface?
> 
> It makes seven kinds of sense to me to have two different interaction modes for such a device.




Win8 has 2 modes, Metro (now renamed to something I can't recall) and Desktop.  Metro is equivalent to the Start button.  If you launch a Metro-app, you'll stay in Metro presentation mode.  if you launch a legacy app, it'll flip to desktop mode.

Desktop mode looks like normal Win7.  For the record, Win8 is based on Win7.  Only Metro-mode changes the API stack.  When you flip to Desktop mode, you are basically running Win7.  They just turn some stuff off to slip you back to Metro as fast as they can.


Like iOS or Android, Metro is made for doing one thing at a time, with some basic task swapping available.  Good enough for somebody googling while watching TV.  Not good enough for somebody trying to run Visual Studio to write a program, with SQL Server Management Studio open to manipulate the database and IE open with 10 tabs open to research a problem with something plus Outlook, an IM client, and Explorer to look at the file system you are manipulating with your code.

In other news, my buddy just bought a Google Nexus 7 for $250 w/16GB.  He likes it.  He is an iPhone user normally.  The price was the factor for him. He figured he could live without being able to share apps across devices (its not like they're expensive).

He did not cite any reason that struck me as "only Android" could do that, as compared to iOS.  Which is something to remember when we get into nerdy debates about the merits of each OS.  Most normal people aren't interested or are less impacted by the details that we think are important, like storage expansion slots (the Nexus7 has none, btw).  the app stores are over flowing with stuff, the probability of their NOT being an app a normal person needs is low.  There's knitting apps for Pete's sake.

I suspect normal people care about:
is it easy to figure out?
is it durable?
Does it do what I think I want to do (which it turns out is pretty basic and less than what nerds expect)?
Does it look good?
Is there a cheaper model?


----------



## Jupp (Aug 19, 2012)

I think there are cheaper alternatives from Asus (I think it's called the eeSlate or somesuch). I did not go for that one because I am using my Slate as a sketchbook for drawing/painting on the tablet as well and since the Samsung has a Wacom digitizer that was the first choice for me.  But the biggest plus for me was always that I can have multiple applications open at the same time and that I can easily switch between them. This is something you just cannot do with iOS or Droid.

But yes, if you just want to "consume" then an iPad/Droid tablet would be enough. 

By the way, if you want to read up on all things tabletey then I can recommend this site here:  Tablet PC Reviews - Best Tablet PCs


----------



## Janx (Aug 20, 2012)

Jupp said:


> I think there are cheaper alternatives from Asus (I think it's called the eeSlate or somesuch). I did not go for that one because I am using my Slate as a sketchbook for drawing/painting on the tablet as well and since the Samsung has a Wacom digitizer that was the first choice for me.  But the biggest plus for me was always that I can have multiple applications open at the same time and that I can easily switch between them. This is something you just cannot do with iOS or Droid.
> 
> But yes, if you just want to "consume" then an iPad/Droid tablet would be enough.
> 
> By the way, if you want to read up on all things tabletey then I can recommend this site here:  Tablet PC Reviews - Best Tablet PCs




I'd be curious to know how switching apps in Win8 is "easier" than iOS.  Or how having multiple apps open is better.  I don't mean this in an argumentative way.  I haven't spent time with Win8's UI.

For comparison, on iOS, I just double-click the Home button and get to the task manager.  Switching apps is relatively easy.

However, that's not as awesome as seeing what apps I'm running on the Taskbar in Windows.  Or having 2 apps visible at the same time so i can read from one, to do something on the other.  It's also a PITA to copy/paste text from one (like a login name or code snippet) in iOS.  Much easier to have a mouse to lasso the text I want.

And "consume" isn't quite a useful term.  Metro apps are also intended for the "consumption" mindset.  Browsing web pages, watching videos for instance.

But I can use a spreadsheet to manage my D&D character on my iPad (works better than laptop).  or record an album with GarageBand.

Where the tablet paradigm fails is in the heavy data entry and maniplation area.  Writing your term paper on an iPad would suck.  Writing code sucks when you're used to 2 large screens, high resolution and a mouse/keyboard to copy/paste code quickly.  remote controlling a PC (remote desktop) also sucks.  I use an RDP app to control my servers if there's a problem when I'm away from work.  But I'd rather have a large screen and a mouse/keyboard to do so.


----------



## Mallus (Aug 20, 2012)

Jupp said:


> But yes, if you just want to "consume" then an iPad/Droid tablet would be enough.[/url]



Heh... consume does have some ugly connotations, doesn't it? I mean "read". I'm not going to write my novel or code for work on it. I guess I don't see the point of a tablet you _could_ do that on, ie I don't see tablets as a replacement for traditional laptops. 

My wife's an artist and she's made some nice images on her iPad using AutoDesk's Sketchbook app. It's pretty cool.


----------



## Jupp (Aug 20, 2012)

Janx said:


> I'd be curious to know how switching apps in Win8 is "easier" than iOS.  Or how having multiple apps open is better.  I don't mean this in an argumentative way.  I haven't spent time with Win8's UI.
> 
> For comparison, on iOS, I just double-click the Home button and get to the task manager.  Switching apps is relatively easy.




Sorry I was not clear on this but I am not running Windows 8 on my Slate. I have Win 7 installed so it is working like on a standard PC just that you have touch input and/or a pen to draw/write. Of course when I need to write a lot of text I use the bluetooth keyboard and the docking stand. 

I've only tested Win 8 for a week or so. Win8 only is different in that is is basically built for tablet devices and it is quite near to Windows Mobile in how it feels and looks. 

Switching apps might be possible with iOS but the problem for me is that the app gets hibernated when you put it on the background. It is not real multitasking as far as I know and this is one of the big things that pulled me away from iOS and Droid. I want and need to be able to have multiple applications open at the same time because my Slate not only acts as a "reading/consuming/whatever" device but also as a full replacement for an actual notebook or desktop PC. Because I hate to have too many devices at the same time. It tends to end up with one catching dust in a corner shortly after.


----------



## Jupp (Aug 20, 2012)

Mallus said:


> My wife's an artist and she's made some nice images on her iPad using AutoDesk's Sketchbook app. It's pretty cool.





Yep, I have Sketchbook Pro and Painter installed on my Slate as well. It's just great to start a sketch on the tablet and then continue the drawing on the desktop later on with the Cintiq.


----------



## Janx (Aug 20, 2012)

Jupp said:


> Sorry I was not clear on this but I am not running Windows 8 on my Slate. I have Win 7 installed so it is working like on a standard PC just that you have touch input and/or a pen to draw/write. Of course when I need to write a lot of text I use the bluetooth keyboard and the docking stand.
> 
> I've only tested Win 8 for a week or so. Win8 only is different in that is is basically built for tablet devices and it is quite near to Windows Mobile in how it feels and looks.
> 
> Switching apps might be possible with iOS but the problem for me is that the app gets hibernated when you put it on the background. It is not real multitasking as far as I know and this is one of the big things that pulled me away from iOS and Droid. I want and need to be able to have multiple applications open at the same time because my Slate not only acts as a "reading/consuming/whatever" device but also as a full replacement for an actual notebook or desktop PC. Because I hate to have too many devices at the same time. It tends to end up with one catching dust in a corner shortly after.




well, multi-tasking versus task swapping may still be a misnomer.  You only have one keyboard, and that keyboard is only addressing the current active application.  As a human, you are not multi-tasking on a computer most of the time.

true multi-tasking on a computer comes into play when App1 is actually crunching some data, while you go work with App2.  Downloading files, calculating Pi, converting data is the kind of thing where letting App1 work while you do something else in App2 is useful multi-tasking.  Note that watching a video and working on something else would also count as multi-tasking (the App needs to continually update the screen, despite the user not actively working in it).

but what you may be needing is to SEE both App1 and App2 (app1 might be a web browser with information you need, and App2 is the program you are trying to use that information in) that still doesn't necessarily mean you are multi-tasking in the most meaningful sense of the word.  The number of clock cycles App1 is consuming is minimal.  What's most important is being able to SEE both the apps at the same time.  You aren't actively engaging App1.  And if you do, suspending App2 to hop to App1 is not a big deal if the transition back and forth is quick.  Emphasis on quick.

the ability to see 2 Apps at once is where the tablet OSes (iOS/Android) are missing.  It is an intentional design trait, as most basic users on a PC would maximize their apps anyway.  Few people browse on a 15" or smaller screen with Outlook, IE and MSN visible all at the same time.  Take that lesson to an iPhone, and it's a simple enough design concession.

However, as I've seen in Win8 Metro presentations, it DOES have a multi-app on screen mode without "windows".  When a user drags or however to bring in the second app, they can do a 50/50 split, or 1/4 to 3/4 split of the two apps.  This covers the simple use case of "I need to SEE App1 while using App2"  Metro does this locked window sizing, rather than letting the user futz with dragging window sizes until they are happy.


----------



## CAFRedblade (Aug 21, 2012)

I don't know if the OP has now picked up his new iPad, whichever version he was eying.  Just thought I'd point out that a rumored launch/refresh of Apple's product lines is probably coming/to be announced in Sept.  

Why you should wait for the iPad Mini | Mobile - CNET News

Which includes the potential for a 7in. iPad, which may be far cheaper and to his liking.


----------



## CAFRedblade (Aug 21, 2012)

Umbran said:


> Are you sure that's the nature of Win 8, or just the Metro interface?
> 
> It makes seven kinds of sense to me to have two different interaction modes for such a device.





From what I've read Umbran, I believe there are two models of Win8 tablet coming, the lower cost will compete directly with it's brethren as a purely mobile tablet device, runs on the ARM chipset, and you are locked into the "Metro" UI only.  The more expensive version, (running around $1000, could be less or more costly), will be a full computer in tablet form, and can go to a traditional desktop UI, and can have programs installed in desktop fashion.. although it lacks a cd/dvd drive, so it'll require either software only installers most likely. At least that's what I've read on several gadget sites.  Perhaps that info is out of date however..?


----------



## Mallus (Aug 21, 2012)

CAFRedblade said:


> Which includes the potential for a 7in. iPad, which may be far cheaper and to his liking.



No... still haven't bought anything yet... anniversary dinner was rather expensive... feeling guilty about spending money right now. This, I assure you, will not last... 

I wasn't considering a 7' tablet, since I want to use it for reading comics and gaming manuals. They benefit from more screen real estate.


----------



## Janx (Aug 22, 2012)

CAFRedblade said:


> From what I've read Umbran, I believe there are two models of Win8 tablet coming, the lower cost will compete directly with it's brethren as a purely mobile tablet device, runs on the ARM chipset, and you are locked into the "Metro" UI only.  The more expensive version, (running around $1000, could be less or more costly), will be a full computer in tablet form, and can go to a traditional desktop UI, and can have programs installed in desktop fashion.. although it lacks a cd/dvd drive, so it'll require either software only installers most likely. At least that's what I've read on several gadget sites.  Perhaps that info is out of date however..?




I've seen some waffling on the ARM=Metro only, but on the technical front, it looks like ARM will only run the Metro stack.  

ARM is a wimpy processor and can only run stuff compiled for it.  Desktop mode is running the full win7 x86-style stack and that software cannot run on ARM.

This did raise some interesting questions in my .NET community about whether the Metro marketplace for software had to carry both ARM and x86 versions of the app, and whether that would be seperate downloads.

You can't install a Metro app from outside the MS marketplace, per the last details I'd heard.  Just like an iThing.


----------



## Umbran (Aug 22, 2012)

CAFRedblade said:


> From what I've read Umbran, I believe there are two models of Win8 tablet coming




Yes, that's my understanding as well.  



> ...although it lacks a cd/dvd drive, so it'll require either software only installers most likely. At least that's what I've read on several gadget sites.  Perhaps that info is out of date however..?




It matches my understanding.  Note that the expensive version, at least, will have at least one usb port.  So, external drives are possible.  Not that many folks are installing things from CDs nowadays anyway....



Mallus said:


> I wasn't considering a 7' tablet, since I want to use it for reading comics and gaming manuals. They benefit from more screen real estate.




You need more real estate than a seven _foot _tablet?!?  I mean, sure superheroes are larger than life, but I dont think you need that much space for comic books 

More seriously - I have a Nook tablet, and while I admit a larger screen would be awesome for comics, it does a better job with them than I expected.  My Marvel Unlimited subscription is getting a workout on the thing.


----------



## Mallus (Aug 22, 2012)

Umbran said:


> You need more real estate than a seven _foot _tablet?!?



Well... perhaps not _that_ big.



> More seriously - I have a Nook tablet, and while I admit a larger screen would be awesome for comics, it does a better job with them than I expected.  My Marvel Unlimited subscription is getting a workout on the thing.



Interesting - thanks. I probably should keep hemming&hawing until the iPad mini is formally announced, but we're going away to upstate New York over Labor Day weekend, and it's awfully  tempting to buy something before the trip.


----------



## Mallus (Sep 1, 2012)

So I bought an iPad 3, 32GB, wifi only. In fact, I'm composing this post on it right now. So far, it's very nice. The screen truly is a thing of beauty. All the media I've tried look great. In an effort to disenchant myself with it slightly, I'm going to try and edit/compose a document on it next.


----------

