The Apple iPad 2 Review
by Brian Klug, Anand Lal Shimpi & Vivek Gowri on March 19, 2011 8:01 PM ESTThe Web Browser
The iOS UI isn't the only area that doesn't get an update with the iPad 2, the core apps also remain untouched. Mobile Safari on the iPad 2 is effectively the same browser used on the iPhone 4, just on a larger screen.
Web page compatibility is generally pretty good on mobile Safari, with the obvious exception of any website that requires Flash. Apple continues its firm stance on not supporting Flash and hoping the rest of the world will convert to HTML5 or iOS apps. I'm personally not a huge fan of Flash, however I do believe the lack of Flash support is frustrating on the iPad. For most usage it's not a problem, but missing Flash is yet another reason why the iPad can't be an exclusive travel companion for me. There are still far too many niche sites out there that require the use of Flash. And if I'm in a hotel room with only iOS devices and no notebook, not having anything that can run Flash is a problem.
I ran two compliance tests on mobile Safari: Acid3 and the HTML5 Test. Acid3 is near perfect with the exception of an errant box in the lower right hand corner of the final test image:
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
In practice I have noticed more rendering errors and browser issues in Honeycomb than I have under iOS 4.3. There's one particularly nasty Honeycomb bug that I've encountered several times that prevents web pages from loading entirely until you kill the Browser process and restart it.
In iOS 4.3 Apple increased the performance of its JavaScript execution engine significantly. The result is pretty astounding. According to SunSpider the iPad 2 is now slightly faster than the Motorola Xoom, however BrowserMark puts the Xoom well ahead of the iPad 2. Google is extremely adept (and aggressive) at optimizing browser performance, this is one area where I'm not entirely sure how well Apple will be able to keep up in the long run.
JavaScript execution is only one aspect of the total performance equation however. Scrolling smoothness has been a staple of iOS and the iPad 2 does not disappoint here at all. Google made huge improvements in going to Honeycomb, but browsing in iOS is still smoother on the iPad 2.
Web page loading performance also proves to be quicker on the iPad 2, although given Google's advantages in BrowserMark it's clear that this won't be the case for all web pages.
Performance isn't everything when it comes to web browsing, and one area where Google maintains a significant advantage is in its support for tabbed browsing. Mobile Safari still requires that you tap once to bring up an array of browser windows and then once more to select the window you want to view. Apple limits you to a total of 9 browser windows.
The web browser in Honeycomb on the other hand implements tabs just like a desktop browser. Tabbed browsing has a profuse impact on usability, not unlike what we saw on the desktop (when was the last time you used a browser without support for tabs?). The fact that Apple still hasn't implemented tabbed browsing on the iPad is unacceptable.
Apple handles all memory management within mobile Safari for you, so if you happen to leave too many windows open and the iPad runs out of memory iOS will simply evict some of those web pages out of main memory. On the iPad 1 this was more of a pain as it only had 256MB of memory and a 1GHz Cortex A8 CPU, web pages were evicted more frequently and took longer to load when you went back to them. The iPad 2 doubles memory size to 512MB and loads web pages around 50% faster than the original iPad - making the experience much better overall.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
189 Comments
View All Comments
vol7ron - Sunday, March 20, 2011 - link
Smoking the magic of realism, that's the point this device needs to hit. You can take that back to your IPS gods.I didn't say it was feasible to happen right away, but that's where it needs to be for the low-end devices. The upper-end of the spectrum should land in around $450.
BTW, you misunderstand R&D and cost procurement. Just because these devices have a hefty starting price does not mean the cost of materials is even 1/1000 of that price. Whether the service providers are eating the price, or not, it all comes down to the fact that these devices do have a large mark-up. I think you need to consider the cost of an iPod Touch to the iPhone if you need a simpler way to compare - the 3G modem doesn't cost $300 lol and the Touch still had a high mark-up.
"when the competition with a 2 decade head start still hasn’t been able to compete on price" ... no one has had a 2-decade head start. Technology (manufacturing and supply chain) and costs have both shifted over the last 20 years to make things more affordable. You come at this with an emotional response of "that can't happen", when I say it can and it will. Be care about being shortsighted it will come back to bite you one way or another.
name99 - Sunday, March 20, 2011 - link
Look, if you want a crappy cheap computer, go out and buy one. They make $50 computers (none of that extravagant $100 OLPC nonsense) for India powered by 6502s.But at the end of the day you are being disingenuous. You don't ACTUALLY want a $250 PC --- you can get something like that today if you buy a second hand Eee on eBay. What you want is an actual iPad, not something with a tenth of the functionality, but at $250.
Good luck with that.
And spare us this "eventually". If you're not content with a $250 eBay Eee now, buy the time the $250 iPad equivalent comes around, the real iPad 5 will be quadcore, 2GiB of RAM and a retina display screen, and you STILL won't find the cheap equivalent an acceptable choice, not when there's a real device at $600 that is so much better.
medi01 - Monday, March 21, 2011 - link
"Competition" has such devices for as low as about 100$, go google. They don't come with IPS panel or good battery, but how much do those parts cost?Competitors like Samsung do not have any reason to lower prices, as they are competing for different customers anyway. Not to mention, people perceive cheaper devices to be inferior.
medi01 - Monday, March 21, 2011 - link
PSThere are NETBOOKS (from Acer, Lenovo or pretty much anyone) with multi-touch screens for below 300$.
michael2k - Monday, March 21, 2011 - link
They also weigh 2 to 3 times as much and have half or less the battery life.sean.crees - Monday, March 21, 2011 - link
I still am amazed when people complain about the iPad being too expensive. I remember a little over a year ago everyone expected it to have a starting price of $999. It debuted at half that, and people still complain it's too much.It's now a year later, and even Apple's competitors cannot make a device that is competitive with a $499 starting price point or less.
Here is where i see the iPad fitting in. The console and notebook have effectively replaced my PC. Everything i used to do on a PC i now do on either my notebook or my PS3. You're always going to have a cellphone. The tablet then does what you used to use a notebook for 10 years ago.
You end up with a cell phone, a tablet, a notebook and if you want to game, a console.
I don't know if a tablet will ever replace a notebook, maybe for some who can't afford all 3 and have to choose between a tablet and a notebook and don't need the productivity and power you gain with a notebook. Like how a TV is just for media consumption, a tablet is the same but you carry it around with you.
Mishera - Tuesday, March 22, 2011 - link
People complain about the device being too expensive because for what it is capable of doing, and compared to other devices it is overpriced. For Apple the price makes perfect sense for what they portray as a luxury device. It starts with enough room to drop the price (which they did sort of) and to be able to introduce another smaller ipad at some point in the future without cutting into their sails of macs. That's probably why they went with their keyboard choice.I thought about buying one but came to the conclusion that it simply was far to expensive to justify, especially since all I needed was an ereader, and later a new laptop. But I ended up getting on for Christmas so I wasn't complaining. Turns out the iPad is for EXACTLY what Steve said it was for. This is essentially a couch companion. This takes care of all my computer need when I'm at home and don't have to do work. But that's about all it's good for since it's too big to feasible carry around and doesn't replace your laptop.
I still stand by my belief that the ipad is overpriced though much more attractive at $400. I think tablets will be very important in the future, it's just that they are far away and apple right now is only interested in making consumer devices while everyone else follows them. But right now everyone seems happy with just a new toy..
george1924 - Saturday, March 19, 2011 - link
DSC_2328.jpg and DSC_2364.jpggeorge1924 - Saturday, March 19, 2011 - link
Great in-depth review though! Still can't get excited about tablets very much yet. I've had fun playing around with them, but don't think I could justify it along with a laptop, desktop, etc...MonkeyPaw - Saturday, March 19, 2011 - link
Yeah, and the problem with playing with them at the store is that they always look really gross. I was messing with a tablet at a store today, and immediately washed my hands afterwards. I'm not a huge germ-a-phobe, but when I guy blows his nose, then approaches the electronics, I just start getting uneasy. I guess the screen just shows what's on all the mice and keyboards there, too. :p