The Apple iPad 2 Review
by Brian Klug, Anand Lal Shimpi & Vivek Gowri on March 19, 2011 8:01 PM ESTHDMI Mirroring
With the iPad we complained that the A4 didn't seem to include any form of digital video output, only analog outputs were supported. The A5 and the iPad 2 both rectify that as Apple now offers a $39 Apple Digital AV adapter that gives you HDMI out directly from the iPad 2.
The Digital AV adapter is a bit clunky and I believe the future of this is clearly in some form of wireless transmission, but for now it plugs directly into the dock connector. Apple had the foresight to build in a second dock connector into the dongle so you can keep your iPad 2 charged while you're mirroring it's display.
With the adapter connected HDMI mirroring just works as you'd expect it to. There's no setting you have to enable, just plug it in to your display and you're good to go. The iPad desktop is upscaled to either fit your display or it'll appear as a box in the center of your panel.
I tried the AV adapter with three different displays: a 720p Pioneer plasma, a 1080p Samung LCD and a 1920 x 1200 Dell PC monitor. With the 720p and 1080p displays I got an upscaled box in the center of the screen
On the 1920 x 1200 Dell panel I got an upscaled image that took up the total height of the screen:
In all cases Apple maintains aspect ratio.
What about functionality? Everything you see on your iPad you see via the HDMI output. If the keyboard appears on your iPad it'll appear on your HDMI display. Personally, I would like to be able to have the iOS keyboard visible on the iPad 2 but not on the image sent over HDMI. Currently it's a pure clone setup...mostly.
If you try to play video while connected to an HDMI you won't get a mirror instead you'll see the video full screen on the external display. This is true for Apple's own video player app as well as 3rd party apps like Netflix. Note that while playing a video you will only see it on the external display, not both.
Audio is passed exclusively via HDMI as well, the internal speaker is shut off.
Battery life takes a significant hit with the HDMI output enabled. While you'll see that our typical usage tests can easily hit 10 hours, over HDMI you can expect battery life closer to 8 hours. It's still not bad but definitely a larger impact than I expected.
HDMI mirroring on the LG Optimus 2X
HDMI mirroring isn't exclusive to Apple, we first saw it appear on LG's Optimus 2X and later on other Tegra 2 devices. While HDMI mirroring turns your iPad into a portable Netflix machine, it also turns it into a semi-dockable PC. The limitations I mentioned earlier still exist. There's no mouse support and multitasking is a pain compared to a full blown PC, but this is just the first step. If all you've got a light usage model and just want a more ergonomic setup at your desk, there's no reason you can't connect to a standard HDMI display and use the iPad 2 as a glorified keyboard/pointing device.
What I would like to see going forward is support for some sort of a pointing cursor within iOS while connected via HDMI - only on the external screen. The same white circle that's used in Apple's demos would work just fine here.
The question I have to ask is whether tablets based on smartphone hardware and OSes are going to become powerful enough to double as portable PCs or are desktop OSes going to become lightweight and efficient enough to run on smartphone class tablet hardware? The latter seems to be Microsoft's strategy with Windows 8. Unify the software and allow it to run on all platforms, while the former is where Apple is presently headed with the iPad. It's clear to me that convergence between desktop and ultra mobile OSes will happen at some point, I'm just unsure which side will lead the merger.
Charging
The iPad 2 uses the same 10W USB wall charger in combination with a 30-pin dock-to-USB cable as the original iPad. The benefit here is any iPad/iPod/iPhone 30-pin dock cable will charge the device (assuming your USB port properly implements the battery charging spec). On the flip side, even with the 10W wall charger you're looking at ~ 4.5 hours to get a full charge on the device. Charging via the PC is even slower - it'll progress at roughly half the rate as you can get via the wall charger. Note that like the original iPad you'll need a USB port that implements the battery charging specification in order to charge from your PC/Mac. All of the new Mac notebooks seem to implement this spec (2010 MacBook Pro, 2011 MacBook Pro, 2010 MacBook Air) and had no problems charging the iPad 2.
The Xoom by comparison avoids this problem. The USB port on the Xoom is only used for syncing, there's a separate dedicated port for the wall charger. As a result you'll get a full charge on the Xoom in 3 hours.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
189 Comments
View All Comments
TareX - Sunday, March 20, 2011 - link
Irrelevant, but is Anandtech gonna do an Atrix review?name99 - Sunday, March 20, 2011 - link
"The Digital AV adapter is a bit clunky and I believe the future of this is clearly in some form of wireless transmission, but for now it plugs directly into the dock connector. "You mean the wireless transmission that ALREADY EXISTS called AirPlay?
Apple HAVE a solution to your hatred of wires. You seem to be upset that they don't have a solution that somehow magically transports video from iPad to your (HDMI and nothing else) TV using some non-existent wireless standard that isn't actually built into your TV.
It's fine to be frustrated at some of the idiocies in tech, but it's truly silly to complain about this one. Apple provides this cable for one, and only one, group of users --- people who actually NEED that physical wire.
BlendMe - Sunday, March 20, 2011 - link
AirPlay doesn't mirror tha iPads screen, it only allows you to stream content. For now. And for AirPlay you need an Apple TV or another AirPlay enabled device. The HDMI adapter allows you to hook it up to almost any recent TV, monitor or beamer.ananduser - Sunday, March 20, 2011 - link
In fact there is a standard already built in in most modern(emphasis on modern) TVs. It is called DLNA. Unfortunately Apple decided that coercing you into using their ecosystem ONLY is the way to go. Personally I find Apple's modus operandi of not giving 2 sh*ts about other 3rd party solutions one of the "idiocies in tech" as you well put it.Regardless, the iPad2(or 1) is a cool gadget(emphasis on gadget) nonetheless. Combined with leading parental controls as:no flash(as a porn enabler), no porn(appstore policy), no bloody/gory games(appstore policy) and a damn spartan simple and fast GUI makes it a great basic computing device for the naive crowd(parents, grandparents etc.). IMO it really shines for children as their 1st computing platform.
That it is also a frequent choice for the tech literate few, good on them... it still is best suited, IMO, for those of the above.
name99 - Sunday, March 20, 2011 - link
Can both of you not read?I was referring to, as I quoted, "The Digital AV adapter is a bit clunky and I believe the future of this is clearly in some form of wireless transmission, but for now it plugs directly into the dock connector. "
How do either of your comments have any relevance to that?
If you want Wifi, you need something that accepts a Wifi signal. Your TV doesn't have Wifi built in, so, yeah, you need some other box.
And DLNA? Really? You want to go there? Go explore the DLNA web pages (http://www.dlna.org/products is a good start) and tell me this pile of turds is EVER going to be relevant to the real world. For god's sake, man, get in touch with the real world. Compare that web page and everything it implies about compatibility nightmares and technobabble with the Apple TV web page.
Anand Lal Shimpi - Monday, March 21, 2011 - link
AirPlay is really for specific content at this point. I'm referring to the future of video out on tablets in general. And I didn't mention it as a knock against the iPad today, just a heads up that in some future version of the iPad you won't need a physical adapter (at least not on your tablet). When you have full wireless display mirroring then you can start introducing more interesting usage models - e.g. tablet as a desktop replacement, tablet as a game console, etc... You can do these things without wireless display but they are definitely enhanced by it being there.Take care,
Anand
Ushio01 - Sunday, March 20, 2011 - link
When ifixit did there teardown of the first ipad it was shown that apart from the battery and the antennas all the other components were kept up the top so why can't a tablet simply be a dock you slot a smartphone in that supplies a larger screen and additional battery's?That to me is a far more appealing device than current tablets.
kmmatney - Monday, March 21, 2011 - link
makes sense to me. I can't see Apple doing this, but maybe on of the Android makers can come up with something along these lines. I'd love to be able to pop my phone into the back of a tablet and use the bigger screen. I'd just keep it near the couch.zmatt - Sunday, March 20, 2011 - link
I still hold that the entire market segment (not just the iPad) is a solution looking for a problem. The idea seems cool but in reality nobody was asking for the tablet. And after using them I still can't see what the attractiveness is other than people buying them cause they are "cool". I take calls and get mobile updates on my Galaxy S, which is more than competent enough for light work such as taking down notes or answering emails on the go. Any real work I do with a computer. I'm sorry but you can't make up for the lack of performance and a real keyboard if you are talking about getting work done. The iPad may be nice for mobile entertainment, but if i already have an mp3 player and a laptop what can it do that they can't? For tablets to be viable productivity devices and not just toys i think they would basically have to evolve into laptops. So again i ask, what's the point?cucurigu - Sunday, March 20, 2011 - link
Thanks a lot for your review, Anand, Brian and Vivek - I was waiting for your opinion on the iPad 2 as it was a gadget most appealing but, as you said, very polarizing for the reviewers.There is something I didn't really understand, even after rereading the Xoom review - both you (Anand and Brian) said the first iPad wasn't your cup of tea in the long run and chances are the new one won't change this (but you're giving it another go). The general impression (one which I also got while looking at the tablet segment) is characterized by their unclear niche - where do they really fit ?
If I understand correctly the first tablet (ipad) didn't integrate with your workflow and the reasons seem to apply to all tablets, however, this sentiment doesn't come off so clearly from the Xoom article - so I wondered : did you have the impression the Android OS was more adequate to your usage patterns ? Meaning, if the Xoom and iPad 2 where left on your desk, which one would you choose to take with you, and for which purpose ?
Once again, thanks and best regards !