The best tablet out there? Wait for it ... - Tulsa World

It's nigh impossible to keep up with all the touch-screen computers that have hit or will hit shelves ever since the iPad kicked off the craze earlier this year. And since most of these new tablets are running Android, it's looking like the Apple vs. Google smart phone war has spread to a different front.

Much has been already been said about the Samsung Galaxy Tab ($400-$650), currently the flagship Android tablet, so I thought it would be most interesting to do a full-on comparison between it and the iPad ($500-$830).

Let's start with the form factor. At first glance, there's little difference: Both are rectangles dominated by a touchscreen. The iPad has Apple's traditional single physical button, while the Galaxy has Google's familiar four.

But the iPad has a 10-inch screen, while the Galaxy is just seven. That might not seem like a big difference on paper, but the iPad looks like a behemoth compared to the Galaxy. So which is better?

Really, it depends on what you want to do with it. While the screen quality of both is good, obviously video on the iPad is much more impressive. The extra size gives you more room to use the iPad's touchscreen as a traditional, 10-finger keyboard when trying to get some serious work done, while the Galaxy's is much more cramped.

Then again, the iPad is significantly heavier than the Galaxy. It's not by much, but that extra weight makes a big difference during extended web-surfing sessions or when reading

a book. Unless you invest in some kind of stand or prop, the Galaxy is much more comfortable in the long term.

Galaxy also has a rear-facing camera with flash, as well as a front-facing camera for video chat. The current version of the iPad doesn't.

As for the content of the Galaxy, it's very much an Android, running the latest version of the system. It's got the exact same layout, the exact same use of widgets, the exact same pull-up menu, you name it.

In fact I couldn't really find anything that's changed significantly from the transition to phone to tablet. That isn't a huge problem, as the Android setup works fine for tablets as is. The many thousands of handy Android apps work just as well on the tablet as they do on the phone.

Then again, the iPad launched with many small tweaks to the operating system to take advantage of its size and move it beyond "fine." Its e-mail client can display messages, a list of mail and options simultaneously, while Android still makes you access one at a time.

And Apple's App Store was revamped to make it easy to find apps tuned for the iPad - smart phone apps look a little grainy when running on tablets. There are tablet-specific Android apps trickling out, but good luck trying to find them, as Android's app store doesn't filter between smart phone and tablet apps.

I should also point out that Apple's weird jihad against Flash - the widely used program that powers most video and browser games on the net - is an even bigger blemish on the iPad than the iPhone, since the tablet just begs you to consume media. The Galaxy runs Flash just fine, though popular TV site Hulu blocks itself.

As it stands now, the iPad is a more fully featured and compelling product than the Galaxy. Then again, the Galaxy can be cheaper, and it's more portable. I'm also sure the iPad and Android will continue to evolve and make for better tablets, so it might be worth waiting to see what comes down the pipeline.

View the original article here

Before 2010 MacBook Air, there was 2004 Sony - CNET

Shades of the 2010 MacBook Air?

(Credit: Sony)

Though a moot point now for consumers, in 2004 Sony came out with an ultrathin wedge-shaped laptop that was a progenitor of the MacBook Air, particularly Apple's 2010 incarnation.

At the Apple event this week in San Francisco, Steve Jobs said the new MacBook Air "is the future of notebooks." That's debatable of course but it's clear that PC makers like Sony and Hewlett-Packard already saw that kind of future a long time ago. The problem was that either their timing was off or they didn't execute the designs as well as Apple--or simply that the laptop was too expensive.

Back in 1998, HP released the ultrathin, 3-pound Sojourn made from magnesium. (And more recently the wafer-thin Dell Adamo XPS eclipsed the older Apple Air by using a heavily wedged design.)

But Sony's offering may be one of the best examples of a laptop that pretty much matches Apple's design--except Sony did it six years ago. The nickel carbon body Vaio X505--no longer available--had some very impressive specs for its time. (See 2004 review.)

Similar to the MacBook Air, the pronounced wedge design was 0.38 inches at the thinnest point and 0.83 at the thickest. The nickel carbon body also squeezed in an Ethernet port, a PCMCIA slot, and a 1394 connector

(Credit: CNET Reviews)

Like Apple's new Air, the Vaio X505 used an ultralow voltage Intel chip: a Pentium M "ULV" 1.1GHz processor. And similar to the Air, it was 0.38 inches at it thinnest point and 0.83 inches at its thickest (and keep in mind this was remarkably thin for a design that was probably conceived in 2002). The Sony X505 was smaller than the 11.6-inch Air, packing a 10.4-inch display, but it was only 1.85 pounds.

2010 MacBook Air

(Credit: Apple)

And the price? When the Sony Vaio X505 came out, it was about $3,000. And that's probably where Apple's new Air breaks the most ground. The ultrasvelte, 2.3-pound Air--which I would argue is the most impressive Apple MacBook design--can be had for $999. Still a bit pricey but far below the boutique, Rodeo-Drive ultrathins of the past. (Note that Apple's original high-end MBA was about $3,000 but mainstream Air models eventually settled in at about half that price.)

So, what does Sony have today? It has the X series, but that's a single-core Intel Atom processor-based design and won't deliver the performance of the Air, which uses a Core 2 Duo processor and Nvidia graphics.

View the original article here