It's not 8 hours of constant use like the iPad is constant 10 hour use. There's an ENORMOUS difference.
The EVO is getting really horrible reviews. The specs look great, but I think it's obvious now that specs don't win the game anymore. In practical use, the Evo is reported to have about 4 hours of battery life. I'm not a real stickler when it comes to battery life, but most good devices let you use them for at least a full day. I get a full day and more from my iPhone 3GS, and the iPad just lasts forever.
Bottom line is that the EVo will never be a serious contender if it's battery life is on par with a 90's laptop.
There are better Android devices out there. And besides, comparing smartphones to the iPad is sort of strange to begin with.
U CAN compare the two, because essentially THEY do the same things. Now comparing an iPad to a lap top isn't right.
It's about speed, ease of use, portability, gaming, screen real estate, and network reliability. The iPad kills 50% of the list(ease of use, gaming, & screen real estate) do these three areas outweigh the other three? Only u can decide that my friend. Let me say though, the iPad is not slow by any means, it is very portable, although u can't pocket it, and the networks bad reception is over exaggerated AND DEPENDS ON WHERE U LIVE.
I use to own an iPhone. Sold it recently because I don't talk on the phone(refuse to pay for minutes i dont use)and I have an iPad which does the same things it does(before iphone4). Now I'm gonna buy a boost because it's just cheaper. Probably won't need the boost after a while because VOIP apps. Just waiting multitasking and push. I know how to be patient.
Now if you are a recording engineer, artist, or u do some type of work where being able to transfer information from iPhone to iPad to Mac or something, it's a whole other story.
They aren't in the same league. Don't try to compare them. I don't mean the same league as in the iPad is better, I mean they are meant for different things. With such an atrocious battery life the phone is not meant to be an end all be all. With that screen on you could probably only even read a book for a couple hours.
Comparing the two is like comparing a bicycle to a car. Both have uses but neither is comparable. Yeah they have wheels and they provide transportation, but that's about the extent of it. The bike is meant to take you usually on shorter distances and slower than a car, just like the phone may have the same basic capabilities but it's not going to get you very far on a phone battery life.
Comparing iPad with Evo is not really fair. Different form factors. But, I hope that Google come out with an iPad clone. The nice thing about Android is that it'll keep coming out with new features, which will keep pushing Apple to put in new features. And in about 1 year or so, HP should be pushing WebOS tablets, and in the end it's good to have choice.
http://www.brinatech.com - iPad, iPhone developer and a little bit of tech blogging
The iPad isn't a phone, nor does it provide Internet connectivity to other people as the Evo does in "hot spot" mode.
The Evo has a tiny screen, and a crappy on screen keyboard. It is useless for content creation.
Being able to "get by" depends on what you need a tool to do. I need my phone to be a phone. I need my iPad to be a web browser. It would be nice if they could play games that I like and take pictures. I could get by without either.
What do you need to "get by?"
I'd used two models of Palm Treo, then a Palm Pre smart phone for years--I use them on a daily basis for web browsing and email when not traveling, and when I travel (which I do a fair amount), I use them for the same things, plus have used the Pre as a way to have some video and games with me for entertainment on the airplane or in cr@ppy hotels in rural areas. Recently I gave up on Palm, and had seriously considered switching to an iPhone, but I didn't want to leave Sprint for ATT Hell (despite the rep Sprint has, I've been totally pleased with Sprint for over ten years, including having the various incarnations of wireless internet over most of those years). I completely abandoned the iPhone idea when ATT imposed bandwidth use restrictions (I know there is talk of iPhone availability with another carrier, but there has been similar talk since the day after the iPhone was announced, and I am tired of waiting). I decided to try Android, and got an EVO immediately after it was launched. I spent all this time explaining my use and experience to help the reader understand where I'm coming from and what my expectations for the devices are, sorry if you've fallen asleep reading this).
I bought a wifi-only iPad for use as a web browser and netflix viewer (through wifi) around the house, plus as a better, though bulkier device for video and gaming when traveling (didn't want to pay for a second 3G plan, so the 3G version wasn't a candidate). I got by for years with just the smart phone, and if I had to pick just one, I'd unhesitatingly pick the smart phone--Portability rules for my purposes, no way I'd tote an iPad around with me all day. And the iPad is too ostentatious to pull out when I'm in an audience during a big meeting or somesuch. Plus I must have a cell phone, even though my phone calling is limited to a couple hundred minutes per month, not massive quantities.
If I'd known and understood about the EVO 4G capabilities before buying the iPad, it's conceivable I wouldn't have bought the iPad, I don't know. The larger screen of the EVO, and the increased apps available compared to my Pre made it a much more satisfactory all-in-one device. I'm glad to have both, but the iPad is really a luxury item for me. If I end up staying with the Android system, and the predictions of Android tablets to compete with the iPad come true, I'll probably buy a second-generation Android table to replace my iPad in a couple of years. The Apple store has a vastly better selection of apps right now than Android, but Android has sufficient (unlike the Palm store), and hopefully that situation will improve over the next few years, and of course Android is more of an open system than Apple is (that's not entirely a good thing, but overall I think it is).
One thing I like about the iPad that I wouldn't use the EVO for is as a way to browse the web around the house from a more comfortable place than sitting in front of the computer. Very nice, and the iPad is much more satisfactory than the small-screened EVO for that purpose.
Neither one is at all satisfactory to type more than a few words on, though the iPad is marginally less-hideous. I originally read this post from my recliner on my iPad, but got up and came to the desktop to type this!
Last point--The battery life of the EVO isn't nearly as bad as the hysteria about it implies. Smart phones as a class have a crummy battery life at this time if you use their advanced features, the EVO is as good as, or perhaps better than my Pre was (for the iPhone groupies out there; yes the iPhone has measurably better battery life than either, but it will still run dry quickly if you sit and surf the web using 3G continuously on it for a few hours). Back to EVO and iPad, the EVO will not hold a candle to the iPad in battery life, nor could it possibly do so with the comparatively tiny space inside it available for batteries. After three or four hours of nonstop 3G web surfing, the EVO will be bone dry. I don't have personal experience, but I gather the 3G iPad would still keep going for two or three times as long.
That's my take on EVO vs. iPad....Yours will depend on what you intend to use the devices for.
I dont think you can compare the two directly - obviously, the iPad cant make a phone call (unless of course, you use Skype or something like that).
Its going to come down to what you are willing to carry. For me the iPad is better at every smartphone function than a smartphone (except as a phone of course). The trade off of replacing a smartphone with the ipad is having to carry 2 devices and the fact that you cant put your ipad in your pocket.
unless you get these pants...
I own both and am thinking about returning the iPad (I made a thread about it) since it's important to me to have a smartphone. I do feel there is quite a bit of overlap (which is why I'm thinking about the iPad -- it's hard to decide when to use the iPad over the Evo or a laptop, or which platform to buy an app on).
Anyway, here are my thoughts.
- Both are great products. I haven't had any quality issues with the Evo and it feels very well polished. Android runs extremely well on it.
- Apps are more expensive on the iPad and there's no trial period, however there are more professionally done apps. There's more creative apps on the iPad by far (drawing, photo manipulation, music sheets, and so on). Android tends to be more geared towards productivity tools, "geek" apps (ftp clients, torrent clients, wifi sniffers, etc.), and free apps.
- I'd say that the iPad wins in gaming, except for two things: 1) iPad games are expensive (usually $6 - $12 for the good ones), and 2) the Evo can run NES/Genesis/Game Boy/SNES roms without jailbreaking and minimal cost (couple bucks per emulator). So it depends on what types of games you want to play -- old classics or new touch games.
- The Evo obviously has multitasking so you can do other things while playing Pandora, podcasts, etc.. It also makes the OS feel VERY fast as you can switch between apps without going back to the home screen (and loosing any work you've done in the process). Downside is that those will eat the battery up quick. The iPad will have multitasking in a few months, and if you are willing to jailbreak it you can enable multitasking now.
- Battery on the Evo is usually down to about 20% at the end of the day with moderate usage (half hour of calling, few dozen texts, half hour of web browsing, hour or two of other misc usage). Same amount of use on the iPad and I'll have 80% of the battery remaining.
- eReading / news reading / etc. is better on the iPad, unless you want to do some quick reading while in a checkout line or something. RSS is still very good on the Evo, which I use it a lot for (NewsRob is an awesome app). One downside to the iPad is the screen resolution. It's around 130 PPI or something, so there is noticeable text fuzziness, whereas text on the Evo (and especially dedicated readers like the Kindle) is much sharper.
- Web is not bad at all on the Evo. The screen is plenty big to fit a good amount of text on screen, and zooming in causes the text to re-render so it fits on screen. I wouldn't want to do hours of web browsing on it, but it's good for 10 minutes at a time. Likewise, I wouldn't want to try and pop my iPad out in a store to read a review of a product, but I would much prefer it for longer use. So to me it comes down to how you want to browse.
- The Evo's keyboard is great IMO for a phone. For me I can type around 40-50 WPM on the iPad, and about 30-40 WPM on the Evo using the stock keyboard. I just got Swype for the Evo, which I think will be faster once I get used to it. I wouldn't write a novel with it, but it's plenty good for responding to emails and such.
So, in a nutshell it comes down to how you want to use it. If you are looking for something that you will pop out and use a few minutes at a time throughout the day for web searches, news reading, some gaming/multimedia, and email (unless you need Exchange), go with the Evo. If you are looking for something with more fun/creative apps and something you'll sit down with and use for hours, go with the iPad.
Although they overlap quite a bit, they also complement each other very well since they are best suited for use at different times. Just don't go with both if you have a laptop--then it's too confusing on which device to use.
Last edited by akdms; 06-17-2010 at 08:40 PM.