text:
The New MacBook Pro Part II: Lower Battery Life Under Vista & SATA Issuesby Anand Lal Shimpi on 6/15/2009 12:00 AM EST
- Posted in
- Mac
81 Comments
Back to Article
jpkang - Wednesday, July 15, 2009 - linkThere are a few reports on Twitter (http://bit.ly/10rc69">http://bit.ly/10rc69, but some right after WWDC that are not currently appearing in search results) that Snow Leopard has dramatically increased battery life. I'm curious to see how much of an impact it will have on real-life battery results (let alone marketing claims) come September. Reply
Eventide - Monday, July 06, 2009 - linkWindows 7 should be better in terms of Battery Performance actually. They rewrote the kernel and scheduler for Windows 7 to let the CPU reach deeper sleep states which was impossible due to interrupts occurring every 8 ms or so.
Could you try to bench Win7 with some more going on like watching DVD? According to MS it should perform better then. Also Vista SP2 may behave differently from SP1 in terms of battery performance. Reply
blufire - Monday, June 22, 2009 - link...addresses the SATA issue.
http://support.apple.com/downloads/MacBook_Pro_EFI...">http://support.apple.com/downloads/MacBook_Pro_EFI... Reply
purezerg - Sunday, June 21, 2009 - linkhmm. I installed OSX on my laptop and OSX was 3hrs when it's 8hrs with vista.
Deusfaux - Thursday, June 18, 2009 - link...instead of their advertised 3.0gbps.
Can you look into or at least call THEM out on that too, Anand?
I've been shopping for a HDD dock for a long time now, and it's only taken this long because nobody can seem to provide one with eSATA that runs at 3.0gbps. Reply
majortom1981 - Wednesday, June 17, 2009 - linkI am thinking that its a drivers issue on using windows on a mac and battery life.
Do you honestly expect apple to let windows on their hardware get better batterylife then osx?
I would think its a drivers issue and not how the OS is programmed.
My laptop automatically underclocks itself, dims the screen and other things under vista and windows 7. Does windows 7 do these things on a mac pro? Reply
TEAMSWITCHER - Wednesday, June 17, 2009 - linkHe tested a Lenovo X300 which is similar to the Mac Book Air and got similar results in Vista. So Lenovo must have some pretty bad drivers as well. Reply
SoCalBoomer - Wednesday, June 17, 2009 - linkWin7 would do that only if Apple set up its drivers to do that. . .
Which I sincerely doubt they would do - Apple has no incentive to make a competitor's operating system perform well on their hardware. They want people to switch. Reply
dolcolax - Tuesday, June 16, 2009 - linki was just wondering if the tests for windows was done by booting on windows, or by using VMware fusion or parallels? if you're just emulating windows, will that have an effect on battery life?
so it seems that by using windows, you'll have a higher power consumption? so is it safe to say, that the mac mini which was advertised to idle at 13W will have an increase in power consumption while running windows?
gourygabriev - Tuesday, June 16, 2009 - linkI think the reason why Mac OSX is fairing better in battery life is because the way it uses its resources. I am using a my Macbook right now Aand I noticed that if I open 10 browsers, Only the browser that is currently on the top screen is getting worked on. anything that I've minimized will be left alone, so less cpu cycles are being used. I know this for a fact because if I upload pictures on flickr and i minimize the browser it doesn't upload till the screen is on. Just the workload i guess. Windows always have something running in the background while OSX seems to halt programs I've noticed. Mind you I'm not a techie so I am not qualified to assess anything. This is just something I've noticed when using my stuff. Reply
bspeck1 - Tuesday, June 16, 2009 - linkIf patterns repeat themselves Anand, shouldn't we expect a big update on the MacBook Pro in October? In your recommendation should I wait to buy until October for a faster Intel chip or is this Summer update stellar?? Reply
sadffffff - Tuesday, June 16, 2009 - linkI would take a pc laptop, your lenovo, for example, and install osx on it (assumeing it was compatible enough). It would be interesting to see if the opposite is true. maybe since the lenovo vista battery life is better than the mbp in vista, its osx life would also be better than the mbp. Reply
crispbp04 - Tuesday, June 16, 2009 - linkApple hardware optimized for Apple operating systems, and then comparing it to Vista running on the same device? Confused. Reply
flybefree - Tuesday, June 16, 2009 - linkHere's your answer - we all know that Windows is completely bloated, inefficient operating system. Isn't this good supporting evidence to the fact? Reply
SoCalBoomer - Wednesday, June 17, 2009 - linkNo it's not good supporting evidence to that OPINION. Instead, it's comparing drivers made by Apple for its own operating system to drivers made by Apple for a competing operating system.
Do you THINK Apple would optimize hardware drivers to get the best performance for WINDOWS? Are you NUTS? Reply
JimmiG - Tuesday, June 16, 2009 - linkOn my netbook, I got about 30mins less battery life out of Ubuntu 8.10 LPIA version than Windows XP when browsing the net wirelessly. Much of this was due to the lack of power saving features in the drivers for things like audio, WLAN etc. Also CPU usage was generally higher and stayed at 100% more of the time. Of course, it might not be the same with full featured laptops, but I have a feeling Linux is no more efficient than Windows due to the poor driver support. Reply
nortexoid - Tuesday, June 16, 2009 - linkIt depends entirely on the driver support for your hardware and whether you compile the kernel yourself or whether you just use whatever some distro provides. With excellent manufacturer driver support and a self-compiled kernel, one should be able to obtain better battery life in linux than Windows XP. I mean, OS X IS based on freebsd, which is very similar to linux. Reply
SgtTech - Tuesday, June 16, 2009 - linkI know this is not what this article was about but I bought the MacBook Pro 17" back in March. I have been pretty pleased with it except for one thing. I find that even the shorter battery life under Vista is still very good life as I get about 4-5 hours on my battery under email and web surfing conditions. However, I do have one problem in Vista 64 Bit, I consistantly have lockups, this started after about 3-4 weeks of no problems. Under OS X I have yet to have a lock up so I am pretty sure it is a driver. It gets worse as time goes on. I believe it is a NIC (wireless most likely) issue and am wondering if anyone else has experianced this and if you were able to resolve it. Currently I am trying to isolate it by disabling the wireless controller under Vista. Any help from the Anandtech crew would be helpful. Reply
nortexoid - Tuesday, June 16, 2009 - linkI would be interested in a comparison with various distros of Linux (or just Ubuntu!) under gnome and KDE, using feature-comparable software (e.g. Rhythmbox and Epiphany/Firefox).
I mean, what on Earth would be responsible for such a huge discrepancy between OS X and (every brand of) Windows? Reply
MRC554 - Tuesday, June 16, 2009 - linkApple has total access to all Mac BIOS info - something Vista don´t have. With this extra advantage, Apple can optimize MacOS X for maximum energy consumption - something Vista can´t. That´s the reason MacOS X will always have better battery life on Macs. Reply
Narcofis - Tuesday, June 16, 2009 - linkIn an earlier article you mentionned optimization with the System Managment Controller chip that helps the battery life. I wonder if OS X turns it on and off when it starts.
Just wondering.
thorgal73 - Tuesday, June 16, 2009 - linkI remember OCZ slowing down its Mac version of the Vertex drive, so went to look up a news post about it :
On the other hand I'd still like to know which mobile chipsets do offer speeds higher than SATA150, in practice. Here's a post about that :
Maybe you guys can figure this out ? Reply
pmonti80 - Tuesday, June 16, 2009 - linkAcer Aspire Timeline series is also capable of delivering "8 hours" of battery life at a low price. It's a CULV notebook, but it is quite interesting if you need so much battery life. Reply
abs0lut3 - Tuesday, June 16, 2009 - linkHi Anand,
Would it be possible if the reason OS X has longer battery life compared to Vista was because of Apple "capped" the HD bandwith through software at 1.5Gb/s while Vista and Windows 7 are both running at 3.0Gb/s? Reply
unfalliblekrutch - Tuesday, June 16, 2009 - linkPerhaps there are legal issues with doing this, but for curiousity's sake, perhaps installing OSX on a "windows" notebook and testing to see if that causes it to have a longer battery life than running windows will determine if OSX uses less power or if OSX has hardware specific trickery going on to make the battery last longer. Reply
Methodical - Monday, June 15, 2009 - linkStupid thought, but have you considered, almost just for giggles, running your battery bench in a VM'ed copy of windows?
Most likely the battery life will be even lower..... but there's an ever so slight chance that os x is doing something tricky under the hood, and if so your battery life could increase. Even staying the same could be an indicator, with the VM overhead and such. Reply
gcor - Monday, June 15, 2009 - linkOne reason Vista MAY have a shorter battery life is Microsoft's business model of backward compatibility. As I understand it, in order for MS to support the multitude of old software on it's new operating systems, MS codes and tests specifically for legacy applications. For example, if you want to run the original SIMS on Vista, the OS detects that SIMS is running and performs code specifically so that SIMS works.
The need for specific handling is two fold. The original OS function calls may not have behaved exactly as per the spec, so application developers coded for the actual behaviour provided by the OS. On the flip side, application developers may have developed code that functioned correctly, but were misusing the intended purpose of the OS function calls.
I remember reading that when Vista development was running late, that over 95% of the Vista code base was dedicated to supporting backward compatibility and that it was the biggest cause for delivery delay and restriction of functionality.
If my understanding is correct, then for any given call to the OS, a number of checks are being run for legacy software even when running current applications. This is a backward compatibility tax that we all pay, all the time. With every new release of MS operating system, this problem gets bigger and more complex, requiring more resources at design, code, test and run time. This MAY explain why battery life has reduced in Windows 7 more than Vista, which is intern worse than XP.
Apple reduces these problems in two ways. Firstly, they occasionally break backward compatibility support (e.g. OS-9 to OS-X in 2002). Also, their licensing and testing model for third party applications reduces the amount of "bad but functioning" applications that misuse the OS function calls.
Mind you, I'm not criticising MS for their backward compatibility support. It's what consumers and business have demanded from them and has made them very successful. It's just that the backward compatibility support back to DOS days has a cost for all of us, including MS.
CompOne - Tuesday, June 16, 2009 - linkAmong the many flaws of Vista, and a major reason it was never widely adopted, is the fact that it wasn't backward compatible. I did buy a Vista laptop, but when fewer than half my applications would run on it, I returned it and bought an XP system. Try not making excuses for Micro$oft. They're a multi-billion dollar big boy and can defend themselves. When Micro$oft releases their new buggier, incompatible, operating systems we should instead ask 1)What does this offer thats worth the upfront cost, the time to install it, the time to install all my applications, 2) the cost to replace all my expensive applications that no longer work, 3) the time to find, purchase, and install all the applications that no longer work, 3) the time to learn yet another buggy and unintuitive interface, 4) the cost of new hardware and lower productiviity due to the poorer performance of the bloated and underperforming OS. 5) Does this OS perform the basic functions of an OS well such as disk storage management - Micro$oft has yet to get Windows explorer to work well.
The conclusion is that Micro$oft is not backward compatible, and their self-serving goal of making money hand over fist clashes with my desire for value for my money. Reply
gcor - Wednesday, June 17, 2009 - linkInteresting you think I'm defending MS. I'm not an MS fan. Far from it. In fact, after working as a developer for 20 years, MS was one of the big reasons I recently threw in the towel and have jumped ship into a brand new career, starting with 4 years back in University.
However, about Vista backwards compatibility... I'm not surprised not everything worked for you. On the whole, I imagine MS got quite a lot of things to work, but frankly they don't have a chance of getting all the 3rd party apps AND hardware combinations to work all the time. The permutations and combinations of the problem they are trying to solve is patently ridiculous beyond belief. Trying to get it to work is just silly and believing they can do it is gullible.
Having worked as a master engineer developing telecoms network software for the major firm in the indudtry for over 7 years, I've seen the rod built for it's back by one company where that company controlled every application and every hardware release. In addition, the required quality of all the releases was far beyond a consumer ALT-CTRL-DEL OS like Windows. The problems we had with backward compatibility were enormous. I think MS has NO chance, they don't control all the parts and don't have access to majority of application code or hardware designs. Frankly I think it's futile, BUT, we all expect it of them and they keep promising it. Reply
PhreePhly - Tuesday, June 16, 2009 - linkWhat software didn't work? Pretty much everything I had running on XP ran in Vista. I say pretty much, because, while I can't think of a single program that didn't run, it's been over 2 years since I installed Vista.
I don't run Industrial CADD/CAM software, so that might be it, but those programs were always problematic with an OS change. They are typically certified on a specific hardware/software combo. Other than that, Vista was (I run Win 7 RC at the moment) amazingly backwards compatible as well as stable. After SP1, even better. The "Vista is teh suxor" FUD is getting real old now.
PhreePhly Reply
androticus - Monday, June 15, 2009 - linkOne of the things that annoys me more than almost anything else about Vista on my desktop machine (on which I also run XP sometimes) is its incessant churning of the hard drive -- I don't know what it has to do so much with the hard drive, but it annoys the hell out of me. Does it do this on laptops as well? That would be a sure way to kill the battery life. Reply
sprockkets - Tuesday, June 16, 2009 - linkIndexing services are turned off when on power saver mode, which of course gets activated when you are on battery. Reply
Pirks - Tuesday, June 16, 2009 - linkDoesn't help Reply
Voldenuit - Monday, June 15, 2009 - linkWeird that your X300 battery life results are so low.
I consistently get 4-4.5 hrs of wifi browsing with my X300 (6-cell battery, 6 mo. old, 99% of original battery capacity according to thinkpad Power Manager). Not though that I do use mainly Opera+Flashblock, which might factor into it. Vista SP1 and SP2 both have the same battery life for me. Then again, I've also implemented several SSD tweaks such as turning off Indexing and Superfetch, both of which should trim power usage. Reply
snookie - Monday, June 15, 2009 - linkApple has not done a good job of keeping the Vista drivers up to date. I'm using the Snow Leopard Boot Camp beta drivers with Windows 7 and they are much better. My gues is that you will have to upgrade to Snow Leopard to get netter Boot camp drivers. Reply
vailr - Tuesday, June 16, 2009 - linkSnow Leopard Boot Camp drivers:
http://www.demonoid.com/files/details/1956440/6097...">http://www.demonoid.com/files/details/1956440/6097... Reply
deputc26 - Monday, June 15, 2009 - linkin relation to above statement while the performance will be affected I doubt that any will notice it. Reply
deputc26 - Monday, June 15, 2009 - link"you have to be able to write the data to somewhere else with the same speed" ...RAM Reply
fsardis - Monday, June 15, 2009 - linkSSD depends on NCQ to keep a smooth flow of commands in order to maximise performance and efficiency. Without SATA2 there is no NCQ so who is to say that these high performance SSD will even be able to reach their rated performance let alone hit the SATA1 bottleneck?
Besides, the SATA link has overheads in the region of 5% to 10% so the cap comes at around 130MB/s not 150. I think some 7200rpm disks will be very close to this limit. Reply
Samatros - Monday, June 15, 2009 - link"Without SATA2 there is no NCQ"
^The Intel 925X chipset was SATA I, and was what TH used to test the benefits of NCQ:
And times you'll benefit from the 3.0G bandwidth (listed only if in minutes):
-Defragmenting your SSD
-Dumping your >18GB of RAM to your SSD.
-Enlarging your e-penis
Anything that requires processing is likely to be bottle-necked by algorithms and the processor more than the SATA interface.
Also: I'd be interested to see how a very good Hackintosh performs in comparison to it's native Vista counterpart. That would definitely confirm/deny an architectural advantage, or something fishy.
fsardis - Tuesday, June 16, 2009 - linkExcept that SSDs do not use NCQ the way HDDs do therefore your entire argument is pointless. I think the performance specs given by manufacturers for their SSDs rely on NCQ to keep the SSD controller fed with enough instructions in order to achieve said performance.
there only way to prove it is to test on SATA and SATA2 but from the little I have read on SSDs, the NCQ is actually important for them. Reply
Samatros - Tuesday, June 16, 2009 - linkOkay, I'm having a hard time understanding you. I think you meant to say that SATA-I doesn't have NCQ. You're wrong in that case, as the 925X SATA-I chipset does support NCQ, and does show a notable difference in benchmark. The NCQ support does not drop just because it's an SSD.
Maybe you mean to say that "the NCQ is actually important for {SSDs}", which I completely agree with.
I'm confused by your statement that "SSDs do not use NCQ the way HDDs do." What exactly do you mean? Are you referring to the mechanical aspect of most-efficient path of an HDD versus the command queue of an SSD? That somehow the gains made by always having a task queued is different between them, and having SATA-II fixes this?
The biggest bottle-neck for these laptops isn't the SATA-I interface taking out precious literal seconds from their productivity, it's all the hours of whining.
rundll - Monday, June 15, 2009 - linkFor the moment the Sata 1,5 Gbps speed issue is not that crucial.
In order to be able to take advantage of a faster read capability than 1.5 Gbps you have to be able to write the data to somewhere else with the same speed. Sure there is SSDs which sequential write speed exceeds 1,5 Gbps but not that many nor they do it that much faster than 1.5 Gbps. Not to mention that there isn't any HDD anywhere near this kind of write speeds.
Having said that I still have to wonder why Apple is doing this. It seems so pointless to cause all the BS around this issue for nothing. Not to mention that in the (near) future this "problem" has to be taken care of as the SSD technology takes it's giant leaps. AND like said it is already today possible to find and put in SSDs to your notebook that will take a hit from a too slow Sata interface. Reply
BushLin - Tuesday, June 16, 2009 - link"In order to be able to take advantage of a faster read capability than 1.5 Gbps you have to be able to write the data to somewhere else"
For example, RAM. Read performance is what counts for loading times of just about everything. But in fairness, 1.5Gbps is pretty fast for a single drive even if it is capable of more. Reply
Ailurophobe - Monday, June 15, 2009 - linkThe difference between Windows and OS X could IMHO be partially explained by their different schedulers. A quanta based scheduler like in Windows has to keep at least one core running. In OS X it would in theory be possible to sleep until next interrupt. I doubt this is the actual reason for most of the difference, but it is quite possible OS X really has an architectural edge when it comes to power efficiency.
As for the SATA issue, it is a non-issue. While it is possible to install a drive that can read faster than that, it is infeasible to install anything to a laptop that actually uses data faster than that on a sustained and significantly frequent basis. There are some video and signal processing applications that can do it, but only a complete moron would run them on a laptop or indeed anything without significantly more RAM than any consumer level laptop can support. Reply
mindless1 - Monday, June 15, 2009 - linkIt WAS only infeasible because laptop HDD performance was so lacking. What else can benefit? How about booting? Saving to hiberfile. Loading a game.
It is untrue that there aren't constant gains, disk I/O is one of the biggest bottlenecks in typical laptop use. I'm not suggesting it wouldn't run great with the same SSD in SATA150 mode, but if you're paying a premium you should at least get something premium for the money. Reply
evilspoons - Monday, June 15, 2009 - linkApparently someone (MacRumours, I believe) is reporting that Macs shipped with the built-to-order SSD option are seeing 3.0 Gbps on the SATA interface.
This is all very shady, but it sounds like someone should be able to find the switch to flip (whether it's in firmware or what) to gain 3.0 Gbps mode for those of us upgrading the internal drive to an SSD. Reply
BrooksT - Monday, June 15, 2009 - linkAs far as I can tell, it is literally impossible to get Vista to stop using the disk long enough for it to spin down. Turn off every non-critical service, kill Explorer and every application, and the core OS and required services will still touch the disk once or twice a second.
If OSX can actually sit still for a moment and be happy with what it has in RAM, that may contribute to the different battery performance on the same hardware. Reply
JimmiG - Monday, June 15, 2009 - linkYes, but what about XP? You can easily make the hard drive spin down under XP, yet older reviews comparing Macs under XP and OSX show similar results.
When idle, a Macbook with a full Core2 CPU running OSX uses about as much power as an Atom netbook running XP. No PC laptop running any version of Windows comes close. Got to give credit where credit is due, Apple has really done a great job optimizing the whole platform (OS and hardware) for fantastic battery life. Either that, or Microsoft and its partners have done a horrible job. Reply
Pirks - Tuesday, June 16, 2009 - linkBoth Reply
deputc26 - Monday, June 15, 2009 - linkThe faster you drain a battery the less total energy you will be able to extract from it which is why a 50% increase in capacity will result in a slightly greater than 50% increase in battery life see any load vs. capacity graph here is a page with many: http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb/showthread.php...">http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb/showthread.php...
I originally guessed that this was done intentionally to maximize battery life but since 3Gb/s is baked into the 9400m would this still cut power draw? I suspect that this is still the case as I highly doubt it was an accident and there is no evidence I'm aware of pointing to an OS/Driver bug. While this will limit top speeds I doubt that the user experience will be affected perceptibly. Reply
AvalancheDiode - Monday, June 15, 2009 - linkYou can manually choose Vista power saving option. When forced on maximum power saving, the laptop should run at SpeedStep freq. You guys need to do that test again by forced power saving under vista and see how long it runs this time. Reply
MamiyaOtaru - Tuesday, June 16, 2009 - link"I even chose the maximum power saving profile under Vista" from page one of TFA. Reply
motigez - Monday, June 15, 2009 - linkHi
SATA 1.5Gb/s vs. SATA 3.0Gb/s,
The end user will not care!!!
benchmarks may vary but for a client user SATA 1.5Gb/s is enough taking into account you have enough IOPS. (random access)
UltraWide - Monday, June 15, 2009 - linkmost people won't care, except those that are running SSDs and want their hardware to work as advertised. :) Reply
motigez - Monday, June 15, 2009 - linkeven those using SSD,
SSD benefit is in low latency, faster random operations, this makes the user happy,
Sequential 200MB/s is a bonus but not the main value to the user! Reply
mindless1 - Monday, June 15, 2009 - linkExcept that people pay more for higher SSD performance (SSDs performing beyond 150MB/s cost more than those that don't, and better random I/O also translates into more frequent peaks above 150) so if they don't get that they will want to pay less or receive a refund. Reply
aeternitas - Monday, June 15, 2009 - linkIm a user, and it doesnt matter if thats the main value. Its the second most important thing! Reply
foggytown - Monday, June 15, 2009 - linkI don't know about Safari, but iTunes on Windows is resource intensive. A fairer test might be to test Windows with IE and WMP for comparison. I would be interested to see these results. Reply
GeorgeH - Monday, June 15, 2009 - link+1
OSX comes with Safari/iTunes; Vista/Win7 comes with IE/WMP. Not comparing the OS's with their standard programs seems a little biased - you've effectively given the Mac a homefield advantage.
I doubt it will make much difference, but in the interest of fair play I too would like to see the tests redone. Reply
StraightPipe - Monday, June 15, 2009 - linkCame here to say this.
iTunes gets terrible performance in Windows. If that is part of your tests, it's not going to be a fair fight. Something lightweight (like Winamp Lite) or something native (like WMP) would be a better apples-to-apples comparison.
It's sort of like running a non-native application inside a emulator and expecting the performance/effeciency to be the same.
//waiting for some fanboy to try and use this test as "evidence" that OSX is better than Windows...
//awesome battery power, way to go apple!
//still dont like the non-removable battery. Proprietary 5 point screws to ensure you dont change the battery..tsk, tsk.
//my Dell XPS M1710 can barely get through a 2 hour movie before the battery dies...it's a desktop replacement, so I have no problem running it on a wire. Reply
sprockkets - Tuesday, June 16, 2009 - linkThose screws are just Torx screws. You can easly find Torx screwdrivers anywhere.
Btw, after working with them and Phillips screws, I wish all the screws were Torx. Those Phillips screws get stripped so easily.
In contrast, all the hard drives I've taken apart, even their tiny screws, as tight as they were put in (via air screwdrivers), all come out without stripping. Reply
slashbinslashbash - Tuesday, June 16, 2009 - linkNope. Torx uses 6-pointed stars. These are 5-pointed stars. Reply
sprockkets - Tuesday, June 16, 2009 - linkWell, at least the top one was... Reply
DigitalFreak - Monday, June 15, 2009 - linkThere have been people who've installed Win7 on the new Macbook Pro and it still only runs at 1.5g. Definitely not an OSX problem. Reply
winterspan - Monday, June 15, 2009 - linkThe SATA 1.5Gbps issue on the new 13" and 15" Macbook Pro is even more SEVERE than expected.
(The 17" Macbook Pro, white 13" Macbook, and 13" Macbook Air all have SATA 3.0Gbps so are not affected.)
I'm not sure about all the variables in play here, but for whatever reason (perhaps due to different points of overhead and/or controller architecture) people using fast SSDs on the new Macbook Pro 13" and 15" are seeing them bottlenecked at far less than 150MB/sec.
Here are some preliminary results for sequential read and write speeds from a new 15" Macbook Pro versus the older using an OCZ 120GB Vertex:
Test: Sequential File Read and Write Throughput
App: HD Tune Pro 3.50
Drive: OCZ Vertex 128GB (MLC)
Old MB Pro 15" (same SATA II as 13" MBA/13" MB/17" MB Pro)
Sequential READ = 225 MB/sec
Sequential WRITE = 180 MB/sec
New 13" and 15" MB Pro (SATA I)
Sequential READ = 115 MB/sec
Sequential WRITE = 95 MB/sec
Bottom line, if this is a hardware problem that can't be corrected by firmware, Apple REALLY SCREWED UP. Although you'll still get the benefits of fast random access in the OS and applicaitons, The SATA I in the new 13"/15" MB Pro will cause an enormous performance degradation when copying large files or transferring large files to and from external drives --- on the order of losing >50% of your throughput! Reply
Shadowself - Monday, June 15, 2009 - linkHow is this going to limit any transfers to or from an external drive? The fastest external interface on these machines is the 800 Mbps Firewire (1394b) interface. That is way below (after subtracting overhead) the 115 MBps and 95 Mbps maximum you give. Thus I don't see any reduction in the read/write to an external drive let alone the >50% you claim. Reply
JarredWalton - Monday, June 15, 2009 - linkExternal devices aren't the problem; the problem is internal SATA drives running at half their designed bandwidth. That said, how much file copying (i.e. sequential transfers) do you do on a regular basis? Even if those situations are half as fast as they could be (and they're more like 60-70% as fast), I don't think I copy large files around on my HDD much at all, and if you only have a single HDD it's mostly a non-issue. Still doesn't make sense, though. Reply
Fallen Kell - Monday, June 15, 2009 - linkIts not OS but DRIVER problems, which in a sense, still is an OS specific issue. Reply
sprockkets - Monday, June 15, 2009 - linkno, its a BIOS/EFI setting then if both OSes cannot operate at 3gb. The 3gb speed has been out for years, and other MacBooks have no issue with operating at 3gb. Reply
mitocho - Monday, June 15, 2009 - linkHave you though about wiring the new MBP battery to the old MBP? I'd like to see just how much of a difference the battery makes. Seems like the new MBP has some extra optimizations. Reply
winterspan - Wednesday, June 24, 2009 - linkJust wanted to mention that Apple has already issued a firmware update that has corrected the SATA problem and enabled SATA/3.0Gbps functionality on all new MB Pros... Reply
Intelman07 - Monday, June 15, 2009 - linkDid you get the optional 9400M + 9600M GT? I think Windows will run the discrete 9600M GT instead of the 9400M integrated card. Reply
Anand Lal Shimpi - Monday, June 15, 2009 - linkThis is the base $1699 model, there's no 9600M unfortunately. The results echo what I've seen in the past with OS X vs. Vista, it's just nice to have an update. Hopefully we can get a real response from Microsoft this time.
Take care,
Anand Reply
sprockkets - Monday, June 22, 2009 - linkTake a look at what the .7 update to 10.5 is doing for these Mac people.
http://episteme.arstechnica.com/eve/forums?a=dl&am...">http://episteme.arstechnica.com/eve/for...=dl&... Reply
Intelman07 - Monday, June 15, 2009 - linkWow, that is a shame. I was looking at purchasing one of these (first saving) for school. It would be nice to go ~7 hours without a charger on campus. I suspect most of the tools I use are Windows only though (I am almost certain).
There is a real lack of good Windows PCs in the market. Nothing with battery life near as good, or a body construction out of one nice block of metal. My piece of crap Dell Inspiron 1520 is literally falling apart at this point. I have had 5 repairs on it. I suffered from the faulty 8600M GT, then my motherboard went bad, then my ram went bad, then my LCD flickered, now my casing is getting small cracks....
What is one to do!?! I might just settle for lab computers at this point :( It would be cheaper. Reply
teohhanhui - Tuesday, June 16, 2009 - linkIsn't Inspiron in a totally different price range? Reply
Intelman07 - Tuesday, June 16, 2009 - linkI paid ~1800 for my Inspiron. That is pretty much in line with the MBP. It was one of the first to have the Santa Rosa chipset.
And yes, I would think that Apple Macbook Pros are higher quality, since they use a metal casing and not plastic. Plus innovative battery technologies. I have never owned one though, I could be wrong. They feel nice in the store. Reply
Pirks - Tuesday, June 16, 2009 - linkAre you saying that Macs are more expensive because of higher quality, and not because of the shiny logo? Reply
Fallen Kell - Monday, June 15, 2009 - linkI know that on my 17" Unibody Pro Vista uses the 9600M which does chew up the battery life. Vista support isn't really that great... It took me about a week to get it really stable and even then I still have to attach a mouse to get right clicks to work properly. I didn't think the power usage was just due to the OS, but mainly from the use of the 9600M. Looks like there is even more of a battery tax for using Vista (I currently mostly use OS X, but eventually might do more). Reply
strain - Tuesday, October 22, 2013 - linkCould you explain your test methodology and tools? Reply


text:
|Start Date & Time
|End Date & Time
|Service Issue Updated: Apple Mail not receiving email for Office 365 Email accounts
|Tuesday, August 1, 2017 - 4:21pm
|Service Issue Reported: JMP Licenses for Mac is invalid
|Friday, August 18, 2017 - 9:00am
7:30 a.m. – 7:00 p.m.
12:00 noon – 6:00 p.m.
7:30 a.m. – 7:00 p.m.
12:00 noon – 6:00 p.m.
The UCB Files service will undergo routine maintenance on Friday night, July 19, starting at 10 p.m. The maintenance will cause the service to be intermittently unavailable for up to two hours.
During the maintenance you may not be able to access your files on the UCB Files service or file services with the names "cworld," "files," "cvcn," "thebrain," and "ebiofiles." This maintenance will not affect access to local files on your computer.
If you have questions about this maintenance, please contact the IT Service Center at email@example.com or call 303-735-4357 (5-HELP from a campus phone). Email and phone help is available Mondays through Thursdays, 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.; Fridays 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m.; and Saturdays and Sundays, noon to 6:00 p.m. Learn more at www.colorado.edu/oit/service-center.
Service alerts are posted for planned service maintenance and unplanned service outages.
To subscribe to service alerts, log into this website by clicking the "Login to subscribe" link near the top of this service alert. Once logged in, scroll to the bottom of this page and click on the grey (+)Subscribe button to subscribe to all service alert content.
Learn more by visiting OIT's Service Alerts page.
7:30 a.m. – 7:00 p.m.
12:00 noon – 6:00 p.m.
University of Colorado Boulder
© The Regents of the University of Colorado

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Know what device every visitor is using to visit your website.
Use that knowledge to deliver a richer user experience and drive business growth.
Take your website to a whole new level.
Read More Downloads
Discover how your customers are viewing your website - what device, what screen size…
Learn how your website performs and discover great insights into how customers behave based on their device.
Richer content, better user experience, increased engagement.
Heavy weight images are a major cause of slow performance.
Managing multiple image assets is a pain.
Use image optimiser to improve performance and reduce image management overheads.
Identify the connection speed and quality of every website visitor.
Deliver a better user experience on your website, by tailoring your content based on your customer's connection.
Great user experience, reduced shopping cart abandonment, better performance.
51Degrees legal terms and conditions.
Find out how our products have been used to improve user experience and to maximise revenue.
Read Case Studies
To generate these results in your business contact us.
Contact Us
Understand how 51Degrees works with web platforms.
Learn about APIs for .NET, C#, C, C++, Java, Node, PHP, Perl, Python, NGINX, Varnish and JavaScript.
Browse API Docs
There's documentation about the data model, migrating from competitors and how 51Degrees works.
Read More
Download Premium or Enterprise data with a paid for licence key or login.
Download Data
Download open source APIs for .NET, Java, C, C++, Node, PHP, Python, Perl, NGINX, HAProxy and more.
Select an API
Browse the full list of properties available in 51Degrees device detection solutions. Find out what values are supported in the Lite, Premium and Enterprise data sets, including full descriptions and advice on how they can be used.
Enter a useragent and find out the associated device, operating system and browser.
Blog entries focused on API changes and uses.
Community support forums for questions and answers concern all 51Degrees products and services.
Purchase 51Degrees device data subscriptions and other products and services.
Answers to common questions about 51Degrees products and services.
Find devices contained in the 51Degrees data sets by vendor, model or using free text search. View the properties and values available for each device.
Compares the major measures, licencing models and costs associated with 51Degrees, DeviceAtlas and ScientiaMobile's WURFL product.
Find out how 51Degrees redefined the device detection industry.
Logos and corporate images useful to press, bloggers and affiliates.
Mobile device emulators for Windows based operating systems recommended by 51Degrees.
All tutorials assume that you have completed the Installation step.


text: HomeTabletsSamsungGalaxy Note 8 Samsung Galaxy Note 8 Cases The Samsung Galaxy Note 8 is a stylish tablet, complete with its handy S Pen. Get protection that's just as handy with Samsung Galaxy Note 8 cases from The Snugg that will prevent any scratches or dings to the surface of your tablet. With great quality — yet surprisingly affordable — tablet cases in a range of styles and colours, we guarantee we'll have the cover for you. Simply browse our wide array of inventory online to find a case compatible with your device. The perfect Samsung Galaxy Note 8 case is just a few clicks away. The best Samsung Galaxy Note 8 cases balance protection with style. At The Snugg, we've made sure to create protective cases out of quality materials that don't sacrifice aesthetics. Available in many different colours, our cases can serve as a great complement to your tastes or preferences. All of our covers offer to safeguard your device wherever the road of life may take you or it. If you're a buyer interested in purchasing a large volume of Samsung Galaxy Note 8 cases for your business, organization, or educational institution, contact us for more information about deals and discounts. We specialize in facilitating bulk orders. Our affordable products make acquiring cases for the entirety of your staff or group a snap, even if you're on a modest budget. Enjoy a significant discount when you order ten or more Samsung Galaxy Note 8 cases at a time. Any plain case for Galaxy Note 8 tablets can be customized at The Snugg. Whether you want your cover to have a specific colour or a fun design, we're ready to make a Samsung Galaxy Note 8 case that suits your particular needs. Complement your cover further by opting to add accessories, like speakers and live wires, to your shopping cart before checking out. We're here to make your cover, case, or sleeve look exactly how you envisioned it. Share your customized case for Galaxy Note 8 tablets with staff, employees, friends, or family to bring your personal group together while protecting your investment in these nifty mobile devices. Sort By: Popularity Newest $ Low - High $ High - Low Filter Device Galaxy Note 10Galaxy Note 10 1Galaxy Note 10 2014Galaxy Note 8Galaxy NotePRO 12 2Galaxy Tab 10Galaxy Tab 2 10Galaxy Tab 2 7Galaxy Tab 3 10Galaxy Tab 3 7Galaxy Tab 3 8Galaxy Tab 4 10 1Galaxy Tab 4 7Galaxy Tab 4 8Galaxy Tab 7Galaxy Tab 8 9Galaxy Tab S 10 5Galaxy Tab S 8 4Galaxy TabPRO 10 1Galaxy TabPRO 8 4 Style Leather clear selected Colour clear selected Price Under $15.00$15.00 - $25.00$25.00 - $35.00over $35.00 clear selected Snugg Galaxy Note 8.0 Case Cover and Flip Stand in Orange Leather $26.99 $8.99 Out Of Stock Available Colors


text: Workers' COMPrehension Dynamic Insights to 2013 Workers' Comp and Healthcare Savings. Comments Email Print March 08, 2013 Updated Dynamic Insights to 2013 Workers' Comp and Healthcare Savings Related LinksThe Big Issue: March 14, 2011What happens if we're no longer witnesses? Morning Roundup Business headlines from Crain's Cleveland Business and other Ohio newspapers — delivered FREE to your inbox every morning. Sign up for the Morning Newsletter.


text:
Amazon Kindle Fire Reviewby Anand Lal Shimpi & Vivek Gowri on 11/29/2011 3:31 AM EST
- Posted in
- Mobile
- Amazon
- Kindle Fire
- Kindle
- Tablets
71 Comments
Back to Article
StormyParis - Tuesday, November 29, 2011 - linkThe original Nook Color, at $200, was an heck of a deal. The current proprietary tablets (Nook Color 2 and Kindle Fire) are a lot less compelling due to the arrival of non-proprietary tablets at the same price point. Those are.. non-proprietary, and offer arguably better features.
I'm still happy ith my original Nook Color. WHen it gets replaced, if it does, it probably will be by a true, un-walled-gardened, tablet. Reply
Wierdo - Tuesday, November 29, 2011 - linkArs had a good review of the Nook tablet here:
"I have less doubt about the Nook Tablet as a capable product than I did about the Kindle Fire. The experience is not frustrating or jagged and doesn't feel as unfinished... However, I do have some doubts about the value of the Nook ecosystem. Amazon's selection in all categories seems a bit more diverse..." Reply
rruscio - Tuesday, November 29, 2011 - linkI wanted an entry level tablet that was an eReader. Check. But ...
1) I really miss having Skype on here. Really.
2) The lack of Google native apps results in my using the browser for gmail, Reader, et al. And then Google gives me links to all the other apps. Not the most comprehensible experience.
3) The single/double/drag tap issues are more annoying than they need to be.
4) wiFi isn't immediately available when the device wakes up. It takes some number of seconds to make the connection. The "wiFi not available" error is easily resolved by me tapping again. Why isn't is resolved by the app / OS waiting instead?
5) The entire software experience seems less than fully baked. Yeah, I get the Christmas rush thing, but I don't have experience with Amazon updating software. Hope isn't change.
6) The device feels familiar because I'm used to my Droid Inc. The speed is better, and the screen size is acreage versus postage stamp.
If there's ever a phone that just 1) phone calls 2) text messaging 3) wiFi hot spot 4) non-larcenous plan, I'd predict that, and a tablet in this form factor, will kill the smart phone business.
Great review. Reply
genomecop - Thursday, December 01, 2011 - link1. I dont miss it at all.
2. Not true. It comes preloaded with an email app that has gmail setup.
3. Dont know what your talking about never have this issue
4. Dont have this issue and I use mine all day long.
5. Have no problem with the software at all. Everything works very smoothly.
Just want to add...I've had an Ipad since launch and I have since stopped carrying it around. This fits in my coat pocket for use at the gym while doing cardio. At work, on my desk for quick web browsing. RSS feed for all Tech related news. Gmail. Reading on the subway. Uses my phones hotspot in the cab for use. Quick download of movies. I think its a great device. Reply
mcturkey - Tuesday, November 29, 2011 - linkIn your conclusion, you state that $199 should be the entry level price point now. I'm anxiously awaiting your review of the Nook Tablet to see if that extra $50 is worth it (excluding my personal bias towards B&N for their willingness to fight back against Microsoft's ridiculous patent war against Android). Reply
tipoo - Tuesday, November 29, 2011 - linkAgreed, the new Nook looks interesting. I remember reading it has a larger battery than the Fire. Locking all but 1GB of its memory to B&N content sucks, but I'm sure someone will take that limitation off. Reply
Lucian Armasu - Tuesday, November 29, 2011 - linkHardware wise, the extra 8GB of internal storage, extra 512 MB of RAM, and microSD slot, I think it;s worth it. Still I think the extra $50 would be worth it a lot more with the full Android experience. If the other Android manufacturers could put android 4.0 on an equivalent tablet to Kindle Fire, and price it at $250, I'd pick that one any day. You can still get all Amazon's services on the full Android, too, so no point limiting yourself for $50. Reply
nace186 - Tuesday, November 29, 2011 - linkI don't understand why you are comparing the Fire with all the tablet out there that's in a different class. What it should really be compare to is the Nook Color, and the Nook Tablet. Which either of them were included. Reply
Wierdo - Tuesday, November 29, 2011 - linkYeah I read a review on Ars about it and they think the Nook tablet is a more capable product but Amazon has the edge in the ecosystem department, link posted on this thread somewhere if interested. Reply
VivekGowri - Tuesday, November 29, 2011 - linkWe'll have a Nook Tablet review that touches on the comparisons to the Kindle Fire relatively soon :) Reply
Fincanejoe - Tuesday, November 29, 2011 - linkI will try to correct you but you are so turned around a far off the path that this may be difficult.
I own a Kindle 2 as well as a Kindle Fire and have owned a ipad and android tablet:
* No one who owns a Kindle (non Fire) would ever suggest Kindle Fire, ipad, or Android tablet could ever replace the passive - not light emitting - Kindle as a reader. Anyone who has stared at a computer screen for too long and/or Kindle owners understand this.
* Kindle Fire is not trying to accomplish all the tasks the ipad or android tablets are trying to accomplish. That's just it "trying to accomplish".
The ipad and droid tablets are tweeners trying to accomplish what laptops do well and cell phones do well all in one device. The problem is none of the tablets does the job very well at his point and. They are "cool" devices but one the cool wears off and reality sets in you realize a tablet is not as good as a laptop (for what laptops do) and not good enough as a cell (for what cells do) to replace either. That's why I returned my ipad and adroid tablet after the cool factor wore off (couple of days).
The Kindle Fire does not try to bite off such a large chunk of the pie. It fills a smaller niche and does it well. I use my google account (mail,docs,etc) and Amazon account for storing content. What the Kindle fire does is manage and connect me to all this content exceptionally well with a better screen, much longer battery life, smaller footprint. ipad is too big, this device is just the right size for this purpose. And yes if I want to read a book in a pinch amazon sync bookmarks where I left off on my real reader, Kindle 2.
Lets not for get this small item either - K Fire sets you back $200 while the ipad sets you back at least $600 until the next great device comes around in about 6 - 12 months.
This is how Kindle Fire is an Apple ipad market share "stealer" not killer. Sure there will be the Apple fanboys but aside from that, the practical people will stick to their laptops, cell phones, and Kindles. Reply
solipsism - Tuesday, November 29, 2011 - linkLots of hate for tablets. You might want to rethink that for a more objective position. Reply
Sabresiberian - Wednesday, November 30, 2011 - linkUmmm - well, if he hates tablets, I say he has a right to, since he has actually bought them and used them. He at least had an open enough mind to try them out before he decided that they don't work very well.
;) Reply
joshv - Wednesday, November 30, 2011 - link"No one who owns a Kindle (non Fire) would ever suggest Kindle Fire, ipad, or Android tablet could ever replace the passive - not light emitting - Kindle as a reader. Anyone who has stared at a computer screen for too long and/or Kindle owners understand this."
Incorrect. I love the passive Kindle display, but I also read a lot in bed, and I hate the hack of an external LED (clipon or otherwise). The Fire works great in bed, and I suffer no eyestrain whatsoever. It's pixel density is also quite high, so text looks smooth and clear.
I've really never understood the LED eyestrain thing. It just seems like a self-perpetuating meme. People hear it, and when their eyes hurt they go "yeah, must be because I stare at an LED screen all day long". Reply
wicko - Wednesday, November 30, 2011 - linkYeah, I seriously doubt it's the LCD screen that's causing eye-strain or headaches. I look at LCDs 10-12 hours a day, as do many others, and I don't have any problems like that. Sure, there are some more sensitive to light then others (I have brown eyes, which are the least susceptible to problems like that), but it isn't a general thing that happens to everyone, and I see no proof that it's the LCD itself. I start getting headaches when I play Battlefield 3 for too long, and I imagine it's because I'm getting blasted with colour, fast moving objects, and, probably the main cause, sounds of explosions and weapon fire. But I don't have these problems when I'm programming/browsing/etc. Reply
wicko - Wednesday, November 30, 2011 - linkAlso forgot to mention, when I'm playing BF3 and I get those headaches, it's because I've been playing for 4-5 hours straight. If I took breaks in between, I wouldn't need to take tylenol :p Reply
Reflex - Wednesday, November 30, 2011 - linkYou just said you have no problems with LCD's, but then you listed your problems with LCD's.
I think you've missed the point. On eInk there is no need for a break after an hour or two. The screen does not fatigue the eyes. Even if it were in full motion, 3D with color as rich as a LCD, it would not fatigue the eyes to watch. Reply
joshv - Thursday, December 01, 2011 - linkI can read my Fire and stare and LCD monitors all darned day long. No headaches, no eyestrain. Reply
Finraziel - Thursday, December 01, 2011 - linkNope, with e-ink I get a neckstrain because I lie in uncomfortable positions keeping the damn thing within the light... I was actually going to post because I was surprised at Anand/Vivek so boldly stating that e-ink is better than LCD for reading, it's not that simple and just because a lot of people prefer e-ink does not change the fact that it's a matter of preference.
I myself gave my e-ink device (not a kindle but a sony pocket edition, unfortunately I'm on the wrong side of the atlantic, can't get a fire either...) to my mom because I found that I actually preferred reading on my phone(!) to using the e-ink device, exactly because I usually read in dim/dark conditions and as good as never in direct sunlight. Reply
genomecop - Thursday, December 01, 2011 - linkCouldn't agree more. Reply
doobydoo - Thursday, December 08, 2011 - linkWho buys both an iPad AND an Android tablet, particularly given your irrational dislike for tablets?
Very ignorant comments you make.
Kindle Fire IS trying to accomplish some of the same tasks that the iPad does. Eg web browsing - the key part of functionality in the iPad.
The probem is, it does it worse, because it is too small.
iPad and droid tablets are not trying to accomplish what 'laptops do well', at all. They are alternative, lightweight and more simple alternatives when it comes to accessing the web and apps, predominantly. And they do that exceptionally well. There are millions of people who bought them with realistic expectations and therefore kept them, only people with illogical hopes such as the tablet being a work-computer replacement would come away disappointed, and I would be curious which part they didn't realise would happen before they bought?
If anything is a 'tweener' - it's this Kindle Fire. It does the web / app thing - badly. It does the book thing - badly. It's an attempt to combine the best of both worlds, jack of all trades, master of none kind of story.
Which explains why it's cheap.
As for knocking Apple for bringing out devices in 6-12 months (when they have an annual so clearly not a 6 month life-cycle) - how ironic? Lets look at the Kindle release path:
Kindle 2 - Feb 10th, 2009
Kindle DX - July 1st, 2010
Kindle 3rd Gen - July 28th, 2010
Kindle 4th Gen - Sep 28th, 2011
Just over 2 years, 4 products. Ironic much?
It isn't just Apple fanboys who appreciate the use of tablets - it's just people who aren't so ridiculously stupid that they expect a tablet to be a PC. They know what it is, realise its place, and benefit from it enormously. Reply
haukionkannel - Tuesday, November 29, 2011 - linkWell, I am more of e-ink friend because I wan to read books form my tablet. But the option to read allso net pages would be nice, so I am really much vaiting for coulour e-inks displays!
They are stin under development, but offer superior display quality over LCD dispays. The problem is speed, so no fast games to colour e-ink, but the consume very little power and offer cood readability to the text! Reply
RandomUsername3245 - Tuesday, November 29, 2011 - linkAbout 12 months ago I held a prototype color eInk touchscreen display after a talk by an eInk Corporation employee. It was quite impressive, but the color isn't quite up to glossy magazine / photograph quality, and, like you said, it ran at about 12 frames per second.
e-Ink consumes power only when switching pages, so when it starts to run at higher frame rates it becomes much less efficient. e-Ink is great when you switch pages every few seconds when reading a page of text, but if you were asking it to play 10 fps animation or support quick-refresh page scrolling, I don't think it would offer much benefit over LCD. Reply
NorthstarNerd - Tuesday, November 29, 2011 - linkI own both an iPad 1 and a Kindle Fire. Both are good products, but different. I'm amazed how much my Fire can do at $300 less than an iPad. Having said that I HATE the Amazon Carousel, and quickly learned how to get rid of it w/o rooting the device!
http://www.northstarnerd.org/econtent/2011/11/pers... Reply
genomecop - Thursday, December 01, 2011 - linkNo problem on the install, but Kindle Books wont launch from Go Launcher. Reply
PeteH - Thursday, December 08, 2011 - linkKeep in mind the iPad is a previous generation of hardware, and I think it's a little misleading to compare the price points and capabilities of products from different generations. Newer generations of technology always do more for less money. Reply
adamantinepiggy - Tuesday, November 29, 2011 - linkHand the Fire to anyone who has never played with one. First thing they invariably do is bump the power button with their hand. Rest the device against your chest (like when you are reading lying down), 1st thing that happens is power button gets bumped. Look at it wrong and I swear the power button gets bumped by ocular telekinesis magic. Yes you could flip the thing upside down, but having to perform tablet acrobatic to compensate for a crappy layout is stupid.
It seems not one single person bothered to QA the button design when all that was needed was to move it, or cheaper still, make it recessed or much stiffer. Reply
Stuffster - Tuesday, November 29, 2011 - linkThis review has almost everything I could ask for. But it's missing one of the most important questions I have: what about privacy?
How effectively can I use the Fire as an e-reader without providing any personal information - for example, can I just provide a username, password, and something like a one-time-use credit card?
Smartphones, tablets, and e-readers aren't exactly friendly in this regard. I'd love for reviews of these devices to include a page dedicated to the matter of privacy. Reply
cbdoc - Tuesday, November 29, 2011 - linkYou can choose to not have your CC/account info saved on the device making one-time purchases possible. Reply
Stuffster - Tuesday, November 29, 2011 - linkThat's good, but this is an Android-based device. Is it necessary to have a Google account to use it (which would mean providing your real name and birthdate, if nothing else)? Reply
Reflex - Tuesday, November 29, 2011 - linkNo, part of the reason Amazon forked Android was to eliminate Google services and analytics. No Google account required, nothing is shared with Google unless you choose to install their apps and services. Amazon also has very strict privacy policies and does not share user information with anyone(even internally from what I understand). Reply
stationstops - Tuesday, November 29, 2011 - linkAs a commuter, I am on my iPad2 3 hours a day. I would love to try the Kindle Fire as a less cumbersome replacement (for me, it either fits in the pocket of the sport coat or it doesn't), but without 3G, there is absolutely no productivity for me here at all.
Its kind of amazing how little importance 3G is given in the press when discussing Android tablets. They commonly get released with no 3G version at all, and when the 3G versions do come out, they have contracts and pricing which simply can't compete with iPad's liberal Verizon and AT&T month-to-month plans.
Keep in mind that this great 2011 tablet computer has worse connectivity then a Gen 1 Kindle. Reply
melgross - Tuesday, November 29, 2011 - linkIt's interesting that most reviews from Anand pick apart even the smallest problems, but this review seems to gloss over them. Is it really possible that Anand and Vivek didn't have the problems that other reviewers had?
Problems mentioned in other reviews include, turning off the tablet when watching movies, browsing, or doing any activity because of the poor placement and implementation of the
Owner button.
The need to often tap several times to get the screen to respond, or to find that the tablet did, after a lag, detect a tap, but now moves you to something else because you tapped too often.
The lack not only of a microphone, but a rear and front camera, so no Skype possible.
Also no gyro. Amazon doesn't allow apps in their store if it uses any of these features.
Many side loaded apps either don't work, or have problems if they do. And sideloading apps isn't for the average user anyway, so most are stuck with what Amazon approves, which isn't much.
Many tap points are small (and as mentioned, not always responsive), and so people with vision problems or motor control problems will have difficulty with this.
Overall, this isn't such a great product. I'm surprised that Anand didn't go more deeply into this. There's no excuse that it's just $200. For that we should get something that lacks features, but it should still work well for what it does. Reply
Wizzdo - Tuesday, November 29, 2011 - linkI agree. I feel this review isn't up to the usual high standards. The points melgross states are quite salient. Anand mentions that the Kindle Fire is no iPad 2 but this is for many more reasons than size and graphics horsepower alone. Reply
cat12 - Tuesday, November 29, 2011 - linkI have own a older molder kindle (purchased 6 months ago) I was very pleased with it and still am. Well I had to try the fire. I did not like the back light at all. When you work on computers all day you eyes fatigue. With the older kindle seems like you are reading a book and is much easier on the eyes.
As far as the internet web browsing it was redundant since I have laptop etc... The film quaility of the movies on the fire was excellent but again redundant.
Also I could view my external mail account but could not open the messages, so it was useless as a business tool. The fire seems to be much heavier, and do not think for a moment that you can use your old protective cover for the fire. You will have to lay out cash for a new one to fit the fire.
I returned the fire after a couple of days and am awaiting my refund from amazon. I will continue to enjoy my older kindle for the "book" reading experience, after all that is why I wanted a kindle in the first place. Reply
NCM - Tuesday, November 29, 2011 - link"Amazon refused to skimp in two areas: compute and the display."
"this is more general purpose compute..."
Please: "compute" is a verb, not a noun. Reply
bludragon - Tuesday, November 29, 2011 - linkThis is my single biggest gripe with the browser, especially in landscape, most of the screen is wasted on the buttons and status bar. Unless I'm being really dumb and missed the option to get rid?
Aside from Netflix, nothing I searched for in the app store was there. I don't think I'm asking a lot...
1. Zinio
2. Google maps
3. Yelp
4. Firefox, opera or some other web browser to get around the browser irks and the few buggy web sites (typically where pop up ads prevent you from seeing the page, or you can't select things on pop up menus) Reply
Bazili - Tuesday, November 29, 2011 - linkIt's time to create a device with both displays and a simple smart cover that shifts the device from one mode to another.
Isn't it possible, is it? Reply
VivekGowri - Wednesday, November 30, 2011 - linkThe NotionInk Adam is a similar idea to what you're talking about. Reply
geniekid - Tuesday, November 29, 2011 - linkA lot of people say they don't understand the comparison between the Fire and an iPad, but I think there's value to such a comparison.
Yes, I KNOW the iPad is obviously a superior piece of hardware to the Fire and it was designed to meet different needs. I need to know EXACTLY what those different needs are. What does that extra $400 dollars buy me? I would guess at least half the people reading reviews about the Fire want to know how it compares to the iPad, EVEN IF THEY ALREADY UNDERSTAND that the two are targeting different demographics. Reply
geniekid - Tuesday, November 29, 2011 - linkJust to add to what I said. At the start of the review you say "The Kindle Fire and iPad 2 couldn't be more different. They are vastly different sizes, shapes and prices. They even serve slightly different functions."
I strongly disagree with that statement. If you asked me what a Fire was out of the blue, I'd say it was a tablet that let you read ebooks, watch movies, browse the internet, and run some third party apps. I'd say the exact same thing if you asked me what an iPad was. Without reading a review comparing the two, I would never know why the iPad is better at all those things. And I would never know why I might still buy a Fire knowing that the iPad is superior at all those things. Reply
DukeN - Tuesday, November 29, 2011 - linkI feel like I'm RIM's personal crusader here on AT, as you seem to neglect their products quite a bit.
Is this really a better device than the $199 Playbook? I suppose for Amazon content oriented folks it might be. Using that specific use niche as a decision maker, the Playbook would be better for those looking to pair it with their Blackberry device (no data plan required, or even Wifi).
The playbook at the same price right now gives you twice the storage, dual 5MP and 3MP cameras, 1080p video recording and silky smooth browser/multi-tasking performance.
Is the Fire really the best $199 tablet at the moment? I think until they spec up their hardware this isn't the case. Reply
VivekGowri - Wednesday, November 30, 2011 - linkCan we have this conversation after the PlayBook gets a native email client? Reply
DukeN - Wednesday, November 30, 2011 - linkUm, it has one called the web browser. Just the way MAJORITY of people access their email with a PC/notebook at home. And it has one that works with users with Blackberry devices. Secondly, knowing that it is coming in February, doesn't it make more sense to buy the better hardware that will add one piece of software functionality? Also, I'll tell you what's blatantly unacceptable, A TABLET WITHOUT A CAMERA. Reply
Reflex - Wednesday, November 30, 2011 - linkUm, you can have web based email on a 7" screen. I'll take a native app, thanks. Web layouts suck on small screens. Furthermore, web based clients suck if I'm not online at the time, I can compose and send messages in an airplane on my Fire just fine and they will get delivered the next time I connect to a WiFi AP7, on a Playbook I'm stuck.
Not saying the Playback is a bad device. Only that its incomplete in ways that the Fire and Nook are complete. If you have a BB, a Playbook is pretty much a given, but for the rest of us, thats not the case. Reply
DukeN - Thursday, December 01, 2011 - linkIf email is that critical to you, as a deciding factor, you probably already have the best thing for email. It's called a BLACKBERRY. And chances are, the only tablet you would then want to buy is a Playbook.
The Fire is like buying a Core 2 Duo because it supports Outlook, while the Playbook is like an i7 that only supports Outlook Web Access until February.
Missing cameras, and half the storage (8GBs will go FAST) is a bigger shortcoming IMO.
Also, by your own words, if you have a BB the playbook is a given. So for millions of people in North America, it is the best tablet, according to you. So how is the Kindle a better buy, at $199? Reply
Reflex - Thursday, December 01, 2011 - linkIt depends on your needs. Nobody is saying that the Playbook is useless. But most people do not own a BB, or if they do they plan to migrate off of it soon(its losing customers quarter over quarter consistently now). And without a BB, the Playbook as it stands is a pretty limiting device.
For someone with a BB, the Playbook is a strong consideration, especially if they intend to keep their BB. But for those of us who do not have a BB, the other 80% of the phone market(I use WP7), a Playbook makes little sense given its limitations. I don't care about a camera on a tablet, my phone does that fine. I do agree that 8GB is limiting, but it is a limit I am willing to live with. If storage was my primary concern I'd have a Nook Tablet since I can use SDHC on it. Also, Amazon has a much more complete app store, plus I can sideload apps from the Google Marketplace as well.
I'm not saying the Playbook is a big deal. But for those of us without a BB, its a pretty incomplete experience comaparatively. Reply
doesitreallymatter - Friday, December 02, 2011 - linkFor a hardware review site I find the conclusion that this is the tablet to get at $199 (as opposed to the playbook) very suspect.
The biggest problems people seem to have with the playbook is the lack of a native email client, which RIM has stated is coming in Feb. This update in February is supposed to bring android support to the playbook as well, however limited it may be. As this review notes though, the app support appears to be limited for the fire as well.
So again, why is this tablet preferred over the playbook which has double the memory, front and back cameras and at least twice the storage?
There is a bias against RIM present in the media and that cannot be denied.
Not sure why I'm even bothering to post here. People have become more fanatic about their phones than people were back in the days of X gaming console is better than Y gaming console. Reply
DukeN - Friday, December 02, 2011 - linkThank you for saying it out loud.
Still waiting for AT's review of a single BB 7 OS device.
I think I've seen major coverage of every single Android, and iOS updates here on AT. Even Windows phone reviews!
But not a single BB review. Granted, only 10-20% of smartphone users are RIM users, but that's still MILLIONS of people. And a lot more than what some of these android/WP7 devices will ever get. Reply
doobydoo - Thursday, December 08, 2011 - linkYou guys can't, or shouldn't just gloss over such a massive failure like not having a proper integrated email client.
That's VERY important for a lot of people, and who wants to buy a tablet which they have to wait 3 months until they can use it properly (assuming the update even comes).
RIM have a bad reputation at the moment for several very good reasons and that's a legitimate factor too - they have all but failed already. People with BB's are moving away, and fast.
The amazon eco system is far superior and the Playbook is just an incomplete and uncompetitive mess. Reply
Reflex - Friday, December 02, 2011 - linkSo come back in February. By then we'll be on the cusp of a new generation of devices. Right now the Playbook is defficient. Its a nice set of hardware with a lacking software stack. Out of the box it simply does not do what most people want. When it does, I'm sure AT will check it out, but having them review it now is likely to simply get it slammed since it simply won't work for most people who do not already own a BB. Reply
ComputerGuy2006 - Tuesday, November 29, 2011 - linkThe "final words" section says "The Kindle Fire is probably the best tablet you can buy at $199.". This is troubling.
It was never explained how a $200 playbook isnt as good as the $200 kindle. Seems to me the playbook has double the ram and double the storage space. The playbook has two camera and a micro-HDMI port.
So as long RIM can keep its promise and make the playbook capable of running android apps, I dont see how the kindle can beat the playbook in ANYWAY unless you want to spend lots of money on the amazon app store. Reply
VivekGowri - Wednesday, November 30, 2011 - linkHonestly, as tempting as the PB is at $199, RIM's utter failure to deliver features that were promised at launch even 8 months after release is pretty worrying. The lack of native email, contacts, and calendar as of December 2011 is blatantly unacceptable. Reply
doesitreallymatter - Friday, December 02, 2011 - linkIt is unacceptable that those key apps are lacking. In 2 months when/if RIM delivers these apps, what will be your opinion then?
As long as those apps are delivered along with the android support, I just don't see how the Fire can compete with the playbook.
I just don't understand how the conclusion has no mention of the playbook at all. Reply
Reflex - Friday, December 02, 2011 - linkIt also does not mention the Nook Tablet. Why? Because it hasn't been reviewed it. If the Playbook becomes competitive, and thats a big if honestly, I'm sure they'll take a look. But really, February? You mean almost a year after the device they give it basic functionality everyone else has shipped with from the beginning?
For me, even if the Playbook was competitive, I just can't see that as a well supported platform worth me investing into the ecoysystem of. Reply
dgburns - Wednesday, December 07, 2011 - linkPerhaps you missed the announce a while ago that RIM has dropped the Android App Player from development? So your touted "android support" isn't coming.... Reply
dgburns - Wednesday, December 07, 2011 - linkThe Playbook will NEVER have the ecosystem Amazon delivers with the Fire. As many commentors have implied, that's a HUGE differentiator.
And to those who say the PlayBook is the better device at $199 if you own a BlackBerry smartphone already, I disagree. I've got TWO BlackBerry smartphones (different models, from two employers) and as nice as the PlayBook hardware is I STILL don't want one. Even "bridged" to a BB, the PlayBook is SO limited. Will it get better come February (or whenever RIM REALLY releases a update)? Probably, but even then it won't have the ecosystem the Fire brings. Reply
jedivulcan - Tuesday, November 29, 2011 - linkI wish this review went into a bit more nitpicking with the display like I've seen with the other AnandTech reviews. In my experience with having two Kindle Fires, the displays are so wildly different that it's almost like looking at two different products when you have them side by side.
The first Kindle Fire I received from Amazon on the day it came out had a duller backlight, some backlight bleeding when viewing older television shows on Netflix, and warmer, almost yellow colors, one or two dead pixels, and hit or miss viewing angles.
The second one I got a week later had a brighter backlight, a ton of backlight bleeding, bright dead pixels on the screen (very apparent in one location), cool blue washed out colors, and terrible viewing angles.
https://img.skitch.com/20111130-dm18ykeb8kud98w4t2... Reply
Reflex - Tuesday, November 29, 2011 - linkTotally bizarre. I'm not implying you haven't seen what you've seen, but I've handled more than a dozen Fire's now and the screens have been consistent with each other and very very high quality. The one I own and took on trips got noticed repeatedly and the first comment most people had was about how nice the screen looked. Its typically the standout feature hardware wise from most people I've discussed it with.
Your situation is odd to me because normally I'd suspect a bad run, but you got them a week apart. I really have no idea, but I will say it does not jive with my anecdotal experience or what I"m reading elsewhere. Anyone else see this issue? Reply
VivekGowri - Wednesday, November 30, 2011 - linkHmmm mine is totally fine, so was Anand's. I really, really like the display quality, though I would have preferred a more neutral colour temperature. I'm not sure why you had so many issues with the display, that's very very odd. Reply
tiffanykennedy - Wednesday, November 30, 2011 - linkMy bf got me a Kindle Fire for my birthday and I love it. It's lightweight and easy to use straight out of the box. The first thing I recommend anyone with a new Kindle do is install the nook app. We got our instructions from www.kindlemad.com through google.
It basically unlocks all the Android marketplace apps and unlocks the device. Super happy! Reply
Reflex - Wednesday, November 30, 2011 - linkI would strongly suggest rerunning the performance tests. Just my subjective point of view, but perf just got a major boost. The browser is certainly faster, and so is the book reader. The UI and tap response also seem much improved. All of the Fire's on the market should autoupdate in the next couple days... Reply
VivekGowri - Wednesday, November 30, 2011 - linkDownloading, I'll post my findings later today :) Reply
Reflex - Wednesday, November 30, 2011 - linkThanks, wanting to make certain I'm not imagining things. Reply
Reflex - Sunday, December 04, 2011 - linkAny update on this? Or waiting for the Nook Tablet review? Reply
Chaser - Wednesday, November 30, 2011 - linkAs I have stated I don't believe the Fire will TAKE marketshare from Apple. But just like the airline price wars of the 80s and 90s, the Fire with its undeniable market recognition will put A tablet in the hands of those that would not have considered a tablet before.
With Apple holding 90% of tablet sales I personally only see iPads in use when I am on business travel. I very rarely seen an Android tablet anywhere in use in public except for a Color Nook. So the tablet scene is expensive iPads and their happy owners. I think the Fire will change that. Reply
Toadster - Wednesday, November 30, 2011 - linkI'm curious how a PC or regular laptop would fare against the Android/iOS versions of the GL Benchmarks... is there one made? Reply
kawatwo - Wednesday, November 30, 2011 - linkJohn Phillips in C&D. Nice! I have the 8 inch Vizio tablet. I bought it to read my digital magazines with mostly as I subscribe to several on Zinio. Zooming only takes a couple taps so that doesn't bother me. You can also pinch to zoom. I am assuming the Kindle works the same way? The Kindle and Nook do seem like a lot of performance for the money if you only need to do the things they can actually do. Reply
freedomfries - Monday, December 05, 2011 - linkwhat kills the competition with this piece is the price, though it's still not as impressive as the iPad's to me... at least when I hold and use one. Reply
Tonii - Thursday, December 22, 2011 - linkreview reasons to buy kindle fire and more @ http://www.kd-ebook.info/2011/12/review-reasons-to...
and KindleShop by amazon http://astore.amazon.com/whatkindle-20 Reply
amazon544565 - Sunday, May 20, 2012 - linkgo check it at amazon.com here
http://amzn.to/KyZTSd Reply