Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 27th Jun 2012 20:27 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 524132
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
I am not impressed by the device's functionality, since we have not seen anything demonstrated and the heads-on was a mere "screen saver".
However Google Glass is on pre-order for $1599 with delivery early next year - that is vaporware?
However Google Glass is on pre-order for $1599 with delivery early next year - that is vaporware?
It is vaporware in the sense that what the people who pre-order it will be getting is vastly different than what was originally announced.
That, and this is for I/O attendees only. God knows when General Availability will be.
To quote TheVerge "It couldn't keep up with iPad". That is not smoothness, that is how fast are the transitions. They didn't say if it was smooth or not. Judging by my "new iPad" and GNex(4.0) it is smooth, though in some cases slower in transitions.
(iPad isn't all that smooth in all cases by the way. Nothing beats WP7, except maybe pure OpenGL.)
I don't think they refer to transitions at all. "Couldn't keep up" meaning stick to your finger responsiveness. Which if they are right, is a big issue.
But regardless, like I said, it is ridiculous it takes this much raw hardware to reach kinda sorta parity with iOS. What in gods name could they be doing wrong? Something is seriously fucked.
It is vaporware in the sense that what the people who pre-order it will be getting is vastly different than what was originally announced.
It still has a screen with a screen-saver at the very least, as reported by the same TheVerge.
I don't think they refer to transitions at all. "Couldn't keep up" meaning stick to your finger responsiveness. Which if they are right, is a big issue.
The flick through test is less about smoothness of the transitions, than speed of the transitions. However, they didn't explain what they did.
Mind you, the same guys also said that a less powerful GNex(has much less resources for a similar pixel count - 1024kpix vs 922kpix) is as smooth as butter and scored even higher than iPhone4s.
My Nexus S, that has comparable CPU as iPhone4(well, actually the exact same but with a faster GPU), runs very well in comparison with iPad.
To quote Clay Johnson, (from a repost by Tim O'reilly) :
--------
Tim O'ReillyYesterday 23:32 - Public
The ultimate demo smackdown. You do have a way of putting things in perspective, Clay!
Clay Johnson originally shared this post:
Google managed to get an unfinished product to live stream jumping out of a plane, bicycle down a wall, and jump onto a stage. It was done flawlessly when people could have actually died and there wasn't a blip. No crashes, no deaths.
Microsoft Surface's browser wouldn't launch.
---------
Its obvious Google won the presentation show down just on that.. The surface tablet crashed live on stage, how rubbish is that ?




Member since:
2009-05-19
I am not impressed by the device's functionality, since we have not seen anything demonstrated and the heads-on was a mere "screen saver".
However Google Glass is on pre-order for $1599 with delivery early next year - that is vaporware?
To quote TheVerge "It couldn't keep up with iPad". That is not smoothness, that is how fast are the transitions. They didn't say if it was smooth or not. Judging by my "new iPad" and GNex(4.0) it is smooth, though in some cases slower in transitions.
(iPad isn't all that smooth in all cases by the way. Nothing beats WP7, except maybe pure OpenGL.)