Which is better, iPhone or Android?

OC Register ^ | 1-20-2011 | edcoil

[artificial intelligence]

To the average consumer, the war between iPhone and Android is probably very confusing.

Most people don’t know there’s a difference between a “Droid” and an “Android” phone or why these new phones are so different from what came before.

[Melas]

Functions. The only phones allowed have a single radio and no camera. My phone for example has 3 radios (cell, gps and wifi) and two cameras. A definite no-no.

[antiRepublicrat]

And what the $204 device is doing is playing the youtube videos that you see embedded on many many webpages.

The iPad can do YouTube. YouTube is already in the process of moving away from Flash. Browsers that support it can get H.264 or VP8 streams, in MP4 and WebM containers respectively, embedded in HTML5.

[truthfreedom]

What I find most interesting about all of this is watching this generic android tablet market develop.

In 5 years, we’re basically looking at excellent touch screen little computers with all the features you want and none that you don’t. What seems to be missing right now is people, organizations, companies to make that happen. Any company right now could make some money by putting a real brand name on these mid816s. Pierre Cardin? The actual work of making products has been done. But the harder work of telling people these products exist isn’t being done. Distribution, marketing etc. Are there any old electronics brand names that aren’t being used, that could be purchased?

The Crosley MID

8” Tung-Sol audio tablet with 24/192 recording.

These Generic tabs often have no logos on them. They sometimes offer to silkscreen your logo on your tablet.

[truthfreedom]

Generic android tablets match the specs of the ipad.

When the next ipad comes out, it will likely have the best specs. Perhaps not. The Xoom may be about the same or better. But after the ipad is released, newer faster processors are coming on to the market, and the ipad provides a clear target to shoot for. So the specs would likely be passed in a fairly short time. Not immediately. About half the time, the ipad could arguably be seen as best, the other half the tablet with the newest best processors would be best.

[truthfreedom]

I’m not clear on this.

Is the ipad able to show the videos that are embedded in various webpages? If so, how exactly does that work?

[truthfreedom]

On the Herotab mid816 android tablet the default in the video had flash to not show. boxes would be there, but the flash wouldn’t play.

Apple could do a similar thing on the ipad. Leave it off by default. So some users might not know what they’re missing. Make it available to users. If the user doesn’t want to download and install flash, they don’t have to. If they want to, they can. And give the users who do decide to install the flash many options - fully off, partially enabled, fully enabled.

[stripes1776]

Generic android tablets match the specs of the ipad. When the next ipad comes out, it will likely have the best specs. Perhaps not. The Xoom may be about the same or better. But after the ipad is released, newer faster processors are coming on to the market, and the ipad provides a clear target to shoot for. So the specs would likely be passed in a fairly short time. Not immediately. About half the time, the ipad could arguably be seen as best, the other half the tablet with the newest best processors would be best.

How many Xoom tablets have sold so far? The answer is zero.

How many iPads have sold so far? The answer is 16 million. So when the Xoom sells 16 million units, let's resume this conversation.

[truthfreedom]

I don’t think any particular android manufacturer will match apple. There are far more android manufacturers than apple manufacturers. But there will be more androids sold than apples. And Windows tablets are out there as well.

[stripes1776]

I don’t think any particular android manufacturer will match apple.

I think that is probably true. As long as Apple keeps offering a great iPad, they will make lots of money.

There are far more android manufacturers than apple manufacturers. But there will be more androids sold than apples. And Windows tablets are out there as well.

As they say, the proof of the pudding is in the eating. The iPad has been a huge success. Now everyone wants a piece of the action.

I am always happy when companies do well. If someone can sell a lot of tablet computers, great. When someone besides Apple actually does that, we can discuss it. Until then, all we have is a lot of speculation.

[ReignOfError]

Do you look for the New York Times approval of the capabilities of the android devices?

CNet, Gizmodo, Anandtech, PC Magazine, or a mainstream media outlet would be a start. Any serious, independent review based on using the device for at least a few days, not a few minutes, would be a start. Anyone who took the time to try it out and write it up rather than point the camera at it for a couple minutes.

When there is no such review, it's fair to ask why.

Are you saying that the youtube video was faked? That what you’re seeing on the youtube video isn’t actually happening.

Oh, I don't doubt that some Flash content appeared on the tablet's screen for a few seconds. What we don't get is how it handles Flash content that wasn't hand-picked for the review. How that affects the battery. Whether it works in any meaningful sense. It's like showing one of those "professional driver on a closed course" TV commercials and thinking that tells you anything about how a car will handle real-world driving.

What the youtube video shows is that this $204 device can do something that the $500 ipad can’t do. And what the $204 device is doing is playing the youtube videos that you see embedded on many many webpages.

The iPad plays YouTube videos. Try again.

Apple fanboys should just cede the point.

Apple doesn’t have flash. The cheap $204 android does.

You're flogging a device with a 800 x 600 pixel resistive display that boasts (?) a three-hour battery life. In the video demo at http://is.gd/wXJ9oC, video playback stutters and has no audio.

You are obsessive about Flash as a checklist item. Whether it's actually able to do anything useful does not seem to interest you much. You have two criteria:Does it claim to run Flash, and is it cheap. If that's what you want, then buy it.

I’ve asked people - what are the things that the apple devices can do that these android devices can’t?

What is it you want to do? I don't have the time or inclination to summarize the half-millon IOS apps out there.

The apple device is so much more expensive than the mid816 that the apple should be able to keep up with the herotab mid816.

The BMW is so much more expensive that it should be able to keep up with the cup holders on the Kia.

[ReignOfError]

Is the ipad able to show the videos that are embedded in various webpages?

Yes.

If so, how exactly does that work?

Smoothly.

Okay, a bit more detail. YouTube encodes its videos in h.264 as well as Flash. It started doing so in 2007, when the original iPhone launched.

[Swordmaker]

No doubt, Apple will sell a bunch of iPhones on Verizon. They were foolish to limit themselves to AT&T in the first place and doing so helped Android gain a foothold, catch up and even inch ahead.

Apparently, it IS above your pay grade since you choose to misrepresent history so outrageously. Apple was not foolish at all. AT&T was the only network that would make the necessary infrastructure improvements necessary to support the new iPhone AND meet Apple's stringent requirements. All the others, especially Verizon who was offered the iPhone first, wanted Apple to behave like all the other handset vendors and kowtow to their rules: i.e., label the phone with the carrier's name, cripple the applications it would ship with, no visual voice mail, allow the carrier to sell basic functions ala carte, require music, new applications and accessories to be purchased only through the carrier, etc. Only AT&T would agree to Apple's conditions but the cost was iPhone exclusivity under contract for a specific period of time in the US Market. If Apple had not agreed, the iPhone would have been still born. That is not foolish.

[Swordmaker]

However, the fact that they are adding Verizon demonstrates that the iPhone itself is no longer a big enough draw to dictate carrier choice. In the past, a large percentage of smartphone users were willing put up with inferior service from AT&T, because it was the only network that had iPhones. Now most are choosing the best Android phone on their preferred network, or even choosing networks based upon the availibility of certain Android models (like the Evo and Epic on Sprint).

More evidence you haven't got a clue, pay grade. Apple is NOT adding Verizon because the iPhone is no longer a big draw... In fact, Tim Cook said in the conference call that Apple could have sold far more iPhone4s if they could have manufactured them. In other words, Apple can not keep up with the existing demand as it is in the world's markets for the iPhone. . . so they really don't NEED Verizon, they are choosing Verizon as a market, because Verizon NEEDS the iPhone. The statistics belie your claims. On carriers where the iPhone competes with the Android phones, the iPhone is selected by the consumers far in excess of the Android models. When Verizon announced the iPhone would soon be available, the sales of Android phones dropped through the floor at Verizon.

Apple brand loyalty is partially based on good user experience, as they do make solid products. But it is also largely based upon a less rational “fan” mentality. Also, iPhone users tend to be less tech savvy than Android users, and buy iPhones because they know they are good and are not confident in their ability to make the best choice.

So, irrespective of reality, you think that tech savvy people out-number the less tech-savvy so that they will choose Android because they will be confident they will make the best choice, so therefore Androids will then out-number iPhones? How arrogant is that? How smug of Android owners to claim such tech superiority with absolutely no evidence.

You are being illogical. If your argument is correct, then the iPhone would be the one selected because the less tech savvy far out number the tech savvy in the population. Good thing you are wrong... Because your assumption that iPhone users are less tech savvy than Android users is wrong, just as is the usual ignorant claim that Mac users are less tech savvy than PC users is just as wrong.

[Swordmaker]

A youtube video is probably the best proof I can use. Alongside the youtube video I’d like to see a detailed description of whereever youtube on android might fail.

You make the assumption that YouTube videos are all Flash. That are not. Many of them are H.264 and play quite well on iPads and iPhones. YouTube is rapidly converting it's video content to H.264 and dropping Flash. Less than 26% of video on the web is still Flash and most of that is advertising. . . And it's getting less and less every day.

It's been a long time since I've seen a YouTube video that refused to play in situ on my iPad or iPhone. There are still some. . . But they are rare. So your proof is not. Especially when your "proof" says that YouTube itself won't work on your vaunted tablet.

[Swordmaker]

I disagree. You could argue that the android phones are sort of imitations of the iPhone, but the iPhone imitated earlier smartphones (though not to quite the same degree).

Please describe the earlier smart phones that the iPhone imitated. Show how it did so..

[Swordmaker]

Is the ipad able to show the videos that are embedded in various webpages? If so, how exactly does that work?

This is where you continually fail, truth. You keep telling us things you don't know. You have never USED an iPhone or an iPad but you claim to be expert enough to tell us that a $229 piece of junk has the same specs and functionality as the iPad, a device YOU HAVE NEVER USED. . . and repeat those claims when we shoot down our claims using the reviews and specs from your own sources to show you that it doesn't come close! I cannot, for example, find ANYTHING that corroborates your claim of an internal removable 32GB flash drive in addition to the external 32GB, to give a total 64GB... The specs only list 4GB internal. Its maker's specs claim it's expandable only to 32GB... NOT your claimed 64.

You claim equivalent specs. It isn't even close on the screen... The iPad's Is an LED backlit IPS 178° angle of view 9.7" diagonal 1024 x768 resolution high end capacitance multitouch screen display while your tablet you claim is its equal has a fluorescent lit 40° angle of view 8" diagonal 800x600 resistance non-multitouch display! Your tablet has a single 16.8 watt hour battery to drive a more power hungry screen and processor (estimated operation 5-6 hours) compared to the iPad's 25 Watt hour battery (proven operation time 12+ hours)! You say this $229 (plus $40 for more memory) is equal? I say it's a piece of crap. . . masquerading as a useable tablet. You get what you pay for, truth.

[truthfreedom]

You quoted my question in order to not answer it?

What is the answer to my question?

Does it show the flash videos embedded in various web pages or not?

To be fair, I’ve never seen or touched the android. I’ve used the iphone a little bit.

I’m not going to argue whether the mid816 has up to 64 or 32. there are 2 card slots. I don’t know if those card slots will accept 32 gig cards.

Often on these things, the specs are wrong. What the herotab actually has is a 4gig microsd card as its hard drive. You open up the case, remove the 4 gig hard drive and put in a 16 or 32(?) gb microsd card.

It has been tested to work with 16gb cards.

http://www.slatedroid.com/index.php?topic=13992.0
that’s a link to custom system images you can download and install on your hard drive.

“INSTRUCTIONS:

Remove the Internal MicroSD Card

To CREATE/RESTORE a Custom Image and Adjust Partition Sizes”

[truthfreedom]

any youtube related problems are fixed with the mid816 I believe, I could be wrong.

Are you saying that youtube videos that are embedded on webpages do play on the ipad, because typically those youtube videos are no longer flash but are h264?

It’s been a while since I’ve looked at what youtube is doing encoding wise. If I was to upload a video to youtube, youtube would encode it in h.264 and not flash, yes?

[truthfreedom]

thanks. if that is the case, the argument against apple here is weakened. it still doesn’t do flash, it should, but the ramifications to the user are less than they were assumed to be.

[antiRepublicrat]

Is the ipad able to show the videos that are embedded in various webpages? If so, how exactly does that work?

There are different methods of embedding objects, including videos, in web pages. Flash is only one of them. There's a "video" tag in HTML5.