Archive for category Reviews
HTC Desire - first impressions
Posted by David Hurst in Apple, Hardware, Reviews, Technology on July 15th, 2010
I’ve blogged before about my various irritations with the iPhone, which last year prompted me to ditch the shiny Apple handset and opt for a Palm Pre. I liked the idea of the Linux based OS, the multi-tasking and the real keyboard. In reality, the OS was a little limited, but the multi-tasking and real keyboard were good. Build quality, not so much.
When a saw a friend’s HTC desire, I was hugely impressed. The large, bright, high resolution screen, excellent app support and good build quality certainly appealed, but it was the impressive 1GHz processor that sealed the deal. I’m sick of sluggish phones, and the HTC Desire is certainly not sluggish.
There are certainly areas where the Palm WebOS is better, and it’s probably not as intuitive to use as an iPhone, but my first impressions are that as an overall package it beats the competition hands down.
I’ve only had mine for a few days, so I’ll do a more in-depth review when I’ve lived with it for a little longer.
Anyone want to buy a slightly used Palm Pre?
What exactly does the Apple iPad do better?
Posted by David Hurst in Apple, Guides, Hardware, Issues, Reviews, Technology on January 28th, 2010
When Steve Jobs launched the iPad yesterday, he made a compelling case for a device to fill the gap between a smartphone and a PC/Mac. In his words, “If there’s gonna be a third category, it has to be better at these tasks — otherwise it has no reason for being.” Which tasks?
- Browsing
- Photos
- Video
- Music
- Games
- eBooks
So, I thought it might be interesting to look at each of these things and see whether it is better at these key tasks than any of the alternatives.
Browsing
I think browsing the Internet on the iPad would be a nice experience. The screen size and touch interface combined with the portability of the device would seem to offer a better experience than a smartphone, netbook or PC/Mac. However, at the moment there is no Flash player on the iPad, and given that much of the video streaming done on the Internet now runs through Flash, I would see this as a huge fault.
Verdict: better than a smartphone, but simply cannot compete with a PC/Mac. Probably a better browsing experience with that screen than a netbook, but at least my netbook has the Flash player, not to mention a choice of browsers. I don’t believe anyone could say the iPad is better at browsing.
Email
Apple have vastly improved the iPhone email interface for the iPad, but the iPad is not a phone. Surely they should have used Mac Mail as the starting point? By virtue of the bigger screen, the iPad will be more pleasant to use than a smartphone, but given the superior portability of a phone and the cheaper cost of connectivity, it doesn’t really win out in the mobile email stakes. And of course, it can’t match a standard OS for email power and choice of email clients.
Verdict: what’s better? Nothing that I can see. Smartphones are better for mobile email, netbooks and PC/Macs are better at general email. Another defeat for iPad I’m afraid.
Photos
I’m just confused by this. I could see a use for the iPad as a way to share and enjoy photos with family and friends, but its lack of standard USB connectivity ruins this. You can’t just plug your digital camera into your iPad (not without the special adapter/connector, which will be a cost extra anyway), nor can you copy photos onto a memory stick or external hard disk. Presumably you will be reduced to copying all those 10MP photos in your collection via the incredibly slow Bluetooth, or by WiFi, assuming you have an access point nearby.
There’s no camera in the iPad, and it’s not like you would want to actually take photos with a device of this size anyway. Many smartphones on the other hand, do have cameras, and some of them are very good. My Palm Pre has an acceptable camera, with a flash, and is able to upload directly to Facebook, which is actually where I share photos with my friends and family.
Verdict: better than a smartphone or netbook for browsing photos, but much more difficult to get the photos on the device in the first place. Can’t match a PC/Mac for this at all.
Video
This I really don’t understand. The screen is 1024 x 768 resolution, or 4:3 in aspect ratio terms, so there’s no widescreen and given that most video produced now is widescreen, that means you will be chopping part of the video off to make it fit, or you will be forced to watch video in a strip across the middle of the screen. Most smartphones are widescreen, and so is pretty much every netbook or PC/Mac you can buy.
The lack of Flash player means that there’s no chance of watching online TV with BBC iPlayer or other services, and that’s just a huge flaw. And that lack of USB also means no DVD drive either.
Verdict: smartphones may be small but they are at least widescreen. Netbooks have the Flash player and can play DVDs with external drives. Your PC/Mac can do all of these things much better. So where does that leave iPad?
Music
Music? Really? Who is going to want a portable music player with a 9.7″ screen? It could be useful, plugged into an amp whilst streaming music from your main iTunes collection, but on its own the iPad does not look like a revolutionary music device, nor can it do anything better than any other devices.
Perhaps Apple are referring to music production, but given they have supplied no apps for this, I think I’ll stick to Garageband and Logic on my more powerful and usable Macs.
Verdict: iPad does nothing better than anything else.
Games
Again, I don’t get it. Touchscreen games are all well and good on an iPhone or iPod touch, but on a larger device it is a nonsense interface. Plus, the graphics power is hardly going to be blowing anyone away. For the price of a decent iPad you can have a reasonable PC games rig, or you could have a netbook and a games console.
Verdict: smartphones are better for mobile games, and PC/Mac is better for proper games. The iPad probably beats a netbook here, although mine does run Quake3 at perfectly acceptable speeds. I remain entirely unconvinced.
eBooks
And here we get to the core of the issue. If Apple had launched the iPad as the iReader, I think everyone would be happy. Whether or not its screen works as well as the Kindle’s e-ink screen for reading books, remains to be seen. But given the closeness of the pricing on the various reader devices, the iPad makes a lot of sense: pay a little more, get a lot more. Personally, I’d rather sit and read a well thumbed paperback.
Verdict: the iPad’s true reason for being.
Should you buy an iPad?
If you are in the market for an e-reader, then the iPad has to be worthy of consideration. If not, then I don’t believe iPad will do anything for you other than giving you a short period of popularity whilst all your friends and colleagues come to stroke it and dribble on it. I guess if you have money to burn and you want to buy into Apple’s sexily packaged gadget du jour, then go for it.
If you do buy it, just remember that Apple will eventually address all the flaws, just as they did with iPhone, and then in short order they will bring out a better specced, more powerful and cheaper second version, leaving you with an obsolete but attractive door stop.
Apple has always treated its early adopters with an attitude bordering on contempt, yet the fanboys keep coming back for more, always failing to realise Apple couldn’t give a crap about them - they are, and always have been, a corporation interested only in the bottom line, and a bunch of early adopters buying what is essentially a beta version are simply helping to pay for the research and development of the final version, and that is very good for the bottom line.
Apple iPad - a bit of a disappointment?
Posted by David Hurst in Apple, Hardware, Reviews, Technology on January 27th, 2010
Well, the excitement of the launch of Apple’s worst kept secret is over but the hype is probably just going to get worse. It would seem opinion is divided, with some believing Apple’s collective genius has once again solved all our technology needs, whereas others feel the iPad is overrated and something of a disappointment. After having a few hours to reflect, I’m afraid I fall into the latter camp.
Firstly, I have to ask myself what gap in the market the iPad is filling? According to Steve Jobs’ launch keynote, it’s the space between a phone and a computer. Specifically, it needs to be able to browse the web, do email, video, music, games etc., and it must do all these things really well. He then said that netbooks currently fill this gap and they don’t do anything well. So, in Apple’s opinion, the iPad is to occupy the netbook sector and be a lot better than a netbook. Is it? What would I want from a device like that?
I’m typing this post on my netbook. It’s a Packard Bell ZA8. It has a 1.2GHz 64bit AMD processor, ATI graphics, 140Gb hard disk, 2Gb RAM, 3 USB ports, VGA, a card reader and a webcam. It’s running Ubuntu Linux and can therefore multi-task perfectly and run any Linux software I wish. I can completely customise the interface, access my hard disk, plug in a DVD drive or any other USB accessory I like. (It came with Windows Vista on it, which also offers all these things - it ran Vista OK too.) I can plug in my mobile broadband dongle, go online anywhere, video conference - it’s just a smaller more portable (and less powerful) version of my main laptop and desktop, and that’s what I want from a device in this market sector. It cost £300 and it has a better than average keyboard and screen resolution for a netbook. The only downside is the woeful battery life, but at least I can change the battery if I want, and I can upgrade the disk and memory too.
How many of these things can the iPad do?
The Screen
The resolution of the screen is 1024 x 768. When did you last see a new laptop or monitor with that as a native resolution? Consumers want widescreen, not 4:3. Can you imagine how dire widescreen movies will look on this thing? They will play in a tiny strip. This is a massive oversight.
Processor
It’s a custom Apple chip called an A4 and running at 1GHz. Of course without knowing the IPC rate or cache values, it’s impossible to gauge how powerful this chip will be. Apple are pretty good at matching processor power to equipment, so likely it’s fast enough to do everything the iPad does. No doubt it plays smooth video too. My netbook is fine with DVDs, and with video streaming, as long as the canvas size of the video is not too big. Full screen BBC iPlayer doesn’t work on my netbook, but I imagine the iPad could do that… if it had Flash… which it doesn’t.
Disk Space
The iPad is available with 16Gb, 32Gb or 64Gb solid state disks. 16Gb is peanuts these days, and most netbooks offer 100Gb or more. What’s more, the netbook, being basically a cut-down PC, gives full access to the data on your disk, whereas the iPad runs what is basically the iPhone OS and unless they have made changes, that does not currently have any sort of file navigation or management.
No doubt the iPad will be syncing all its data with your desktop and that puts iTunes or whatever software package in control of what you store on your device, and that seems too limiting for a netbook. Frankly it’s annoying on the iPhone and I can only imagine it will be worse on the iPad.
USB
USB is an essential part of modern computing. The iPad doesn’t have it. That means no DVD drives, cameras, flash disks, backup drives etc., whereas my netbook can interface with all these things.
Webcam
Why is there no webcam? Surely a device like this is ideal for Skype and video conference? I can’t believe Apple thought about this and decided the iPad could do without a camera. It’s much more likely that they couldn’t get it in on this version.
Multi-tasking
I ditched my iPhone for a Palm Pre for the simple reason that the iPhone OS does not do multi-tasking. You might think this isn’t a problem, but I quite often spend an evening with my laptop or netbook out, browsing the Internet whilst chatting to friends on MSN or other IM networks. You won’t be able to do this with iPad, and I believe that’s a big let down on a device like this.
My Conclusions
Apple made a big thing about how cheap this device is, but the cheapest one has only a 16Gb drive, no 3G connectivity and still costs more than my more capable netbook. The 3G connectivity will be essential, because without it and without any USB ports, the only way you’ll be able to get online is via WiFi, and that means finding a hotspot. Plus, the 3G costs an extra $130, whereas mobile broadband dongles in the UK are now very cheap. The 64Gb version with 3G is a whopping $829. That’s an expensive netbook!
The iPad is not really a computer like your desktop, laptop or even netbook - it is a cobbled gadget. An iPad that runs OS X would have been an attractive proposition, but I don’t see any value in using a phone OS on a computer. Yeah, sure, it’s a great piece of design. It does what it does really well. Some of the apps look fab. But get past all of that, and it’s really just eye candy. Are you really going to want to scroll through loads of photos on your iPad? Bear in mind that you won’t just be able to hook up your camera to it, so you’ll have to first download all your images from your camera to your computer and then sync with the iPad. Sounds like more work to me rather than making things simpler.
What about music? Well, I already have an iPod, and I phone that can play MP3s. Heck, even my car stereo can play them. How many places do I need my iTunes, and do I really want a personal music player with a 9.7″ screen?
What was the real motivation for making this gadget?
Could it be that Apple sat and looked at its 75 million iPhone and iPod Touch users, and the 125 million app store accounts, and then thought… “how can we squeeze more cash out of these people”? They then looked at the Amazon Kindle and Sony’s reader and decided to make a book store and a larger iPod to put it all on. Then they dress it up as a tablet computer and tell us that it’s the thing we need to fill the gap in our computing life.
Apple fans and gadget fans everywhere will rush out to buy these things without really thinking about whether or not it will actually be worthwhile to have. Apple fans always do. And true to form, Apple will treat its early adopters with usual contempt by bringing out a version 2 with all the features version 1 should have had in short order, and probably with a lower price tag. The thing is not even ready to ship for another 60 - 90 days. What’s wrong with it? Is it not finished? Are there manufacturing issues? Are Apple waiting to see how many people pre-order before they really commit to production? It doesn’t make sense to me.
I love Apple computers and I love OS X, but I hate what Apple the company has become, and the iPad appears to me to be nothing more than a giant ruse to make money. It’s easy to get carried along on the tidal wave of hype and spin, or to be seduced by the touchy feely goodness of the thing, but I won’t be rushing out to buy an iPad I’m afraid. I know that as soon as I get chance to touch one in the Apple store, I will want it, but that’s all it’ll be: a want, not a need. I don’t need an iPad. It doesn’t neatly solve any computing gaps in my life, and is therefore nothing more than a toy. I’ll stick with my trusty Packard Bell netbook. The battery may be crap, but I can forgive it that and carry a spare in the comfortable knowledge that I can do almost everything I would ever want to do with a computer on a device that is small and portable.
O2 Home Broadband review
Posted by David Hurst in Personal, Rants, Reviews, Technology on May 19th, 2009
When is ADSL not broadband? When it’s being provided by O2.
My experience with O2 has been exceptionally poor. I was originally given an install date of the 5th of March, but when this date came, and went, I called up to be told that my install date was actually the 3rd of May. Given that I ordered the service at the end of January, neither of these dates is what you might call “a quick turnaround”. I was given all sorts of excuses ranging from the snow disabling the engineers, to just outright blaming it on BT.
It was finally switched on mid-March. I plugged in the provided router and noticed with some dismay that the wireless only runs at 11Mbps, which would have been fine 5 years ago, but these days I would expect at least 56Mbps support. None of this mattered though because my Internet connection never ventured north of 200Kbps, and only then during the early hours of the morning. In the evening, it sank to speeds slower than a 56K modem.
A few complaints later revealed that O2 (or the providing company Be) was short on bandwidth and were upgrading the service, after which all would be fine. I decided to stick with for the three weeks they told me it would take to upgrade. This has now happened, and whilst speed has improved a bit (I can now get 2Mbps on a good day), it is still much slower than any broadband I have experienced and frequently runs at speeds below 100Kbps. Add to this the fact that O2’s DNS servers seem to fail or stall several times per day and you have a pretty useless connection. On top of this, it now disconnects repeatedly, and by that I mean every hour. And then the final straw to break the proverbial camel’s back: the wireless drops out every 30 minutes or so.
I can rarely watch video. I certainly cannot do any work. The connection is utterly useless and I am sick of it. No doubt I will now have a battle on my hands to get out of the contract, but battle I shall.
I strongly recommend that you do not bother with O2 Home Broadband.
The Facebook facelift
Posted by David Hurst in Issues, Rants, Reviews on March 26th, 2009
Facebook users have recently suffered their once coherent Facebook layout being bastardised beyond comprehension. If this is a “facelift”, then you can expect it to appear soon on “When Surgery Goes Wrong”.
Have you ever heard the time honoured maxim, “don’t fix what ain’t broke”? Here is a classic example. There was nothing wrong with the way Facebook was, having just been improved upon recently anyway. Sometimes, things are just right the way they are - no more engineering is required, just minor tweaks here and there as new technology becomes available. Examples of this might include: the car (4 wheels, an engine and seats - it works); the computer mouse (no, it will not be replaced by gestural systems and touch screens), and; that timeless classic - the wheel.
You can almost imagine the thumb twiddling and finger tapping going on in the Facebook design office as hapless designers and developers struggle to deal with the overwhelming possibility that they’ve already peaked. “Surely there must be something else we can do”, they say. Well, yes. You could bugger it all up completely. You could take all the nice functionality and then just roll it all up into one messy blob and call it the new home page. It’s like the plasticene that you used to play with at school. It came out of the packet in beautiful pristine coloured strips, then the fat kid with the snotty nose and the shorts that don’t quite fit properly, just mindlessly splodges it all together into a green/brown mush. Of course you don’t want to play with it after that, because everything you make will just look like a turd. And that’s how Facebook is now. A turd.
I have a mish mash of different types of information all appearing in one place. Status comments, photos, videos, wall posts, groups et al, all appear in the same confusing list, along with application posts from all manner of ridiculous apps, quizzes, games, virtual gifts and other completely useless crap. I can no longer hide other people’s application posts, I can only hide ALL updates from the person.
Everything has become much less private and much more in your face. In the past, I could see whether one friend had written on another friend’s wall, and if I so desired I could click to read the message. Now, the message is broadcast on my “news feed” which appears to have replaced everything else. However, messages sent to me are nowhere to be seen. I know that someone has written on my wall, because the notifications widget tells me so, but when I click the link, it just takes me to my feed and leaves me then to fend for myself, and I invariably cannot find the message.
In actual fact, if I click on my own name in the navigation, I get something more sensible with a Wall that I can actually navigate, but mysteriously, this feature rarely works properly. Most times, the page doesn’t load, or it just shows the news feed instead. Are Facebook still working on this? Have they forced an untested Beta onto everybody?
I imagine if the Facebook designers were actually tasked with improving the wheel, some bright spark would pipe up: “why not make it octagonal, that way it would be simpler?”, and all around the room wise designers would nod sagely and make it so.
