The New iPad vs. ASUS' Transformer Pad Infinity in Specs

63 Comments

View All Comments

• stktheft - Wednesday, March 7, 2012 - link

  Please avoid using relatives as excuses. Its tantamount to insulting them and their intelligence.
  
  If i give you a tablet, with what we know about tablets right now and you cant use it, be it android, apple, blackberry, then it says more about you than it says about the OS.

• PeteH - Thursday, March 8, 2012 - link

  I wasn't saying the iPad is the only tablet that they are capable of using, I was saying that so long as a tablet works non-geek consumers don't care about whether the OS provides flexibility and freedom. For them the iPad is a perfectly acceptable choice.

• Impulses - Wednesday, March 7, 2012 - link

  Bought an original Transformer over 6 months ago for $300, couldn't be happier with it. Build quality isn't quite up to the standards of Samsung/Apple's tablets, but I do prefer the textured plastic back (doesn't scratch) and the slight extra thickness is no big deal. Heck I recently bought a second one for $350 as a gift even tho the Prime's already out (it's also $150 more).
  
  Frankly I think ASUS should've striven to price the Prime about $50-100 less across the board, because price was one of the things that set the original Transformer apart when the Galaxy Tab 10.1 was selling for the same price as the iPad.They're introducing a new model to replace the OG TF soon, but they're still pricing it at $400 instead of the $300-350 that the original TF is now selling for.
  
  Anyway, beyond all the other things already mentioned, I'd take the 16:10 aspect ratio of these Android tablets over the iPad's 4:3 any day... Dunno why no one ever brings that up anymore, it's like the iPhone's huge bezel, the media just seems to forgive and forget because of Apple's design aesthetic.

• harbourcoat - Wednesday, March 7, 2012 - link

  I agree that for media the 16:9 is the way to go.. I mean you don't see many 4:3 TVs any more and I sure as hell don't see it in the cinema.
  
  The retina display will be cropped at 2048x1152 for 16:9 playback killing off 786432 pixels. 786432 pixels sat there eating up battery life and not making one bit of difference in the media appearance of the ipad 3 video in terms of media ipad is mediocre at best.
  
  The resampling of 1920x1080 video to 2048x1152 is another area of interest. Would you watch the video in 1920x1080 to maintain image clarity and lose 933888 pixels in total.... that's nearly a megapixel of dead screen.
  
  Then again maybe the iPad 3 is a device that makes you not care about these issues.. I think we call them rose tinted glasses but hell people keep buying them so they must be doing something right.

• harbourcoat - Wednesday, March 7, 2012 - link

  recalculated loss of pixels would be >1Mpx

• PeteH - Thursday, March 8, 2012 - link

  I'm sure they'll upscale. After all, you wouldn't play 720p video back at native resolution on a 1080p display, would you?
  
  As long as there's a decent upscaler in the iPad (meaning they're not just using a bilinear filter) I doubt you'd notice a difference in clarity between the unscaled and the up scaled 1080p video, especially with the small pixel size.

• Belard - Thursday, March 8, 2012 - link

  Or... they simply use the extra area for user controls.

• stktheft - Wednesday, March 7, 2012 - link

  wow

• stktheft - Wednesday, March 7, 2012 - link

  Is it just me who thinks 1 gb ram is too small?
  
  I have a feeling ipad3 will surprise us here.

• Belard - Thursday, March 8, 2012 - link

  Its just you.
  
  Its a tablet... not a desktop computer.