ipad or android?


Recommended Posts

I would like to get my dad a tablet for his birthday. He has an iphone and a laptop. He's a simple user, generally MS Office, browsing, facebook, youtube; nothing hardcore.

I wanted to know if an ipad would best fit or an android based tablet. How's youtube with the ipad, heard it doesn't work?

Any suggestions?

Link to comment
https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/1134544-ipad-or-android/
Share on other sites

I'd go for the iPad. Your dad already has an iPhone, so he would probably like to have the same apps on his tablet. YouTube app works fine on the iPad like Astra said. I am using Jasmine for YouTube because I think it's better than Google's YouTube app. From the iPad mini to the iPad with retina, you have choice. You can even go for a refurnished iPad from the Apple Store. It's just like a new one at a fraction of the price, and you still get the standard guarantee and AppleCare, too.

I only have used a Galaxy tablet for a whole 2 hours, so I can't really tell about the real use of an Android tablet.

iPad, full or mini.. He's already in the ecosystem, no reason to change.

Simple to use and understand, excellent app selection, great customer support should there be an issue.

I have an iPad Mini, and a Nexus 7, the Mini wins hands down.

Price is not an issue.

He has a laptop with Vista, then I installed Win7 and hated it. He asked me to install Win XP instead. :|

So maybe an ipad the best choice?

Yes. I believe so. You don't want to be faced with the possibility that he does not like an Android-based tablet.

He really prefer XP over 7? Really? Even I, who use OS X, can see that 7 is way better than XP!

i can say that the nexus tablet would not frustrate anyone. and with google drive widget bar its easy to start a google doc. it works really well and can be saved as a .docx. don't make it more apple unless he thinks his iphone is the bees knees. older people tend to have apple pushed on them. i know a guy his kids insisted he have a iphone and the guy has had headache after headache doing normal thinks like sync with outlook. today he ordered a nexus 4.

I'd say iPad since he's got an iPhone. Would be more familiar to him.

ahh...i'm torn again....

should it be iPad 3 or iPad mini?

iPad mini is probably pretty cool, probably what I'd get myself if I went that route, but seeing is that he already has an iPhone, it would make more sence for him to have something bigger.

iPad. Android tablets are no match when it comes to quality and selection of apps. The hardware may be very good on Android tablets, but that isn't enough.

Also, jailbreak it and get ProTube HD from Cydia; way way better than the stock YouTube app. :D

I bought an iPad2, sold it, bought a Galaxy Tab 10.1, sold that, bought a Asus Transformer, sold that, and bought a iPad 4.. I like how the iPad works and most of the apps I use, work better on the iPad.. Also, the screen on the iPad, is better on my eyes from some reason.

I bought an iPad2, sold it, bought a Galaxy Tab 10.1, sold that, bought a Asus Transformer, sold that, and bought a iPad 4.. I like how the iPad works and most of the apps I use, work better on the iPad.. Also, the screen on the iPad, is better on my eyes from some reason.

the clarity difference is HUGE for my eyes. after having the ipad 3 with the retina screen, everything else now is blurry and gives me a headache after 10-15 mins on an ipad2 and nexus 7 when reading text.

I love the full sized iPad but find it to be a bit on the heavy side. I hope that the next couple of revisions make it light so that it is more comfortable to hold for long periods.

Assuming there was a Retina iPad Mini, I'd go with that because of the weight. If weight wasn't an issue I'd definitely want the full sized iPad. Right now it seems like you have to compromise between weight and display resolution.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • The quantum search for Time's origin had an equally mind-boggling conclusion by Sayan Sen Image by Steve Johnson via Pexels A theoretical study from researchers at the University of Surrey suggested that the direction of time may not be fundamentally fixed in certain quantum systems. The work, published in Scientific Reports, examined how the “arrow of time” could emerge from microscopic physics and found that time-reversal symmetry can remain intact even in models used to describe processes such as energy loss and thermalisation. The arrow of time refers to the observed one-way direction from past to future in everyday life. In macroscopic processes, this is easy to see. Spilled milk spreads across a table and does not gather back into a glass, and heat flows from hotter objects to colder ones. These processes shape the common sense idea that time moves in a single direction. However, at the level of fundamental physics, many equations do not prefer a direction of time. Time-reversal symmetry means that the same physical laws can describe a system whether time moves forward or backward. This has made it difficult to explain why irreversible behaviour appears in the large-scale world even when the underlying rules do not require it. Dr Andrea Rocco, Associate Professor in Physics and Mathematical Biology at the University of Surrey, described this contrast: "One way to explain this is when you look at a process like spilt milk spreading across a table, it's clear that time is moving forward. But if you were to play that in reverse, like a movie, you'd immediately know something was wrong – it would be hard to believe milk could just gather back into a glass. However, there are processes, such as the motion of a pendulum, that look just as believable in reverse. The puzzle is that, at the most fundamental level, the laws of physics resemble the pendulum; they do not account for irreversible processes. Our findings suggest that while our common experience tells us that time only moves one way, we are just unaware that the opposite direction would have been equally possible." The study focused on open quantum systems, which are quantum systems that interact with a surrounding environment. This environment, often described as a heat bath, can exchange energy and information with the system. The researchers used this framework to study how a direction of time might appear even when the underlying physics does not enforce one. A key part of the analysis involved the Markov approximation. This is a simplification used in many models where the system is assumed not to retain memory of its past states. The idea is that changes depend only on the current state, not on earlier history. This is commonly used when studying thermalisation, which is the process where a system settles into equilibrium with its environment. The study also used concepts such as master equations, including the Lindblad and Pauli equations, which describe how probabilities of different quantum states change over time. Another related model discussed was quantum Brownian motion, which describes the random-like movement of a quantum particle interacting continuously with its environment. In these descriptions, a “memory kernel” can appear, which is a mathematical term that accounts for how past states influence current behaviour. The researchers found that applying the Markov approximation did not break time-reversal symmetry. Even when the system interacted with an effectively infinite heat bath, the resulting equations of motion remained symmetric in time. This meant that the same mathematical description could, in principle, run forward or backward in time without contradiction. The study further showed that standard frameworks used in open quantum systems, including quantum Brownian motion and master equations like the Lindblad and Pauli forms, could be written in a time-symmetric way. These equations are typically used to describe processes that look irreversible, such as dissipation and thermalisation, but the results suggested they can also be interpreted as allowing evolution in both time directions. Thomas Guff, Research Fellow in Quantum Thermodynamics, said: "The surprising part of this project was that even after making the standard simplifying assumption to our equations describing open quantum systems, the equations still behaved the same way whether the system was moving forwards or backwards in time. When we carefully worked through the maths, we found that this behaviour had to be the case because a key part of the equation, the "memory kernel," is symmetrical in time. We also found a small but important detail which is usually overlooked – a time discontinuous factor emerged that kept the time-symmetry property intact. It’s unusual to see such a mathematical mechanism in a physics equation because it's not continuous, and it was very surprising to see it appear so naturally." The researchers also noted that deriving a one-way arrow of time from time-reversal symmetric microscopic dynamics remains an open problem across fields such as thermodynamics, statistical mechanics, particle physics, and cosmology. Their results suggested that some standard descriptions of irreversible behaviour in open quantum systems may be better understood using a time-symmetric formulation of Markovianity. According to the study, processes such as thermalisation, which are usually treated as irreversible, could in theory be described in a way that allows evolution in either time direction under the same rules. This does not imply that time reversal occurs in everyday life, but rather that the underlying equations do not strictly enforce a single direction. Overall, the findings suggested that the perceived direction of time may emerge from how physical systems are modelled and approximated, rather than from a fundamental asymmetry in the laws themselves. The researchers noted that this perspective could have implications for ongoing work in quantum mechanics, thermodynamics, and cosmology on the origin of time’s arrow. Source: University of Surrey, Nature This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing
    • A bit premature... 100% Marketing. Bizarre.
    • A $300 price hike is insane! No one is going to want to pay that much!
    • Since the 1st one flopped, there is really no reason to make another one. It's just losing money left and right.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Reacting Well
      BizSAR earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • First Post
      AndreaB earned a badge
      First Post
    • Week One Done
      Huge Trailer earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      Classifyskilleducation earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      eurospharma62 earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      581
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      182
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      75
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      73
    5. 5
      neufuse
      64
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!