iPad Mini-Style Specs, On the Cheap, In Android-Based ASUS ZenPad S 8.0

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

iPad Mini-Style Specs, On the Cheap, In Android-Based ASUS ZenPad S 8.0

Posted by timothy on Thursday September 17, 2015 @12:57AM from the depends-what-you-want dept.

MojoKid writes: The ASUS ZenPad S 8.0 is a well-designed Android tablet based on an Intel X86 platform that boasts better specs than the iPad mini 3 in many areas and is also less expensive. As configured, the ZenPad S 8.0 Z580CA has an MSRP of $299, which is $99 less than the 16GB iPad mini 3, and $199 less than 64GB model. However, it's based on a quad-core Intel Atom Z3580 processor, 4GB of RAM, 64GB of internal storage, and modern amenities like 802.11ac Wi-Fi, a USB Type-C port and a 2048X1536 IPS display. A 2GB RAM and 32GB variant can be found for $199 as well. In the benchmarks, the ZenPad S 8.0 handles pretty well, offering middle-of-the-pack performance in both standard CPU tests as well as gaming, in addition to running the latest version of Android Lollipop.

87 comments

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Dear slashdot, by Anonymous Coward · 2015-09-17 01:05 · Score: 5, Insightful

If you're doing product presentations in this venues, the least I expect is an assessment on how easily a device can be rooted. Otherwise I can go to the abundant shiny press release regurgitators out there.
1. Re:Dear slashdot, by Anubis+IV · 2015-09-17 05:46 · Score: 1
  
  On top of that, can we avoid reviews that appear to be willfully inaccurate? Their comparisons only work if you ignore that they're comparing the year-old, not-even-for-sale-any-longer iPad Mini 3 against their product. Apple announced the iPad Mini 4, it's tech specs, its pricing, and made it available for purchase on the 9th, a full week before this review was published, and pulled the iPad Mini 3 from sale at the same time. Given that Apple keynotes are all over the tech blogosphere whenever they happen and that they're supposed to be a tech news site, it's pretty hard to imagine a scenario where the reviewers unwittingly published this review without an awareness of the fact that their information was inaccurate at the time of publication.
  Now, Apple still sells the iPad Mini 2, despite having removed the 3, since the 2 has identical tech specs to 3 (save for the lack of Touch ID), but it's $269 for the 16GB and $319 for the 32GB, rather than the no-longer-accurate $399/$499 prices the review quotes for the 16GB/64GB iPad Mini 3. Meanwhile, the iPad Mini 4 is significantly more powerful than either the 2 or the 3, and is available at the 3's old $399/$499 prices. Comparisons to either the 2 or the 4, and at their actual prices, would make a great deal more sense than a comparison to the 3.
  Everyone, myself included, has their biases, but let's at least keep the comparisons accurate. Suggesting an obsolete product doesn't compare well against a brand new one is a useless no-brainer. Suggesting an obsolete product is the comparable offering from a competitor is both inaccurate and misleading. Either compare it against the 2, which has the same performance as the 3 but for $130 less, or compare it against the 4, which is priced where the 3 was but is significantly more powerful.
Why x86? by gstoddart · 2015-09-17 01:14 · Score: 3, Insightful

Why are we so slavishly stuck with x86?
When tablets first came out they threw away all the baggage, ans started fresh with a smaller and leaner platform. This gave us battery life, and finally gave us apps which were small, functional, and didn't take gigs of space.
I worry that everybody is going to try to turn these damned things back into x86 based dinosaurs, and start spec'ing out the damned things like desktops, and then we're back to the damned bloatware of old.
The x86 architecture is very old, full of stuff it probably doesn't need anymore, and is just going to encourage people to essentially treat tablets like they're desktops. And while I'm sure it's come a long way in terms of power, I just don't see why we can't keep tablets smaller and less tied to this damned architecture.
But, then again, I guess this allows everybody to be lazy and just reuse the same architecture they've had for decades and slowly turn the tablets back into low end desktops for no good reason.

--
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
1. Re:Why x86? by Anonymous Coward · 2015-09-17 01:17 · Score: 2, Interesting
  
  Cost? Intel optimizes a chipset for a tablet and includes wifi, bluetooth, etc, and suddenly its price/performance is lower than a similar ARM. There is no other reason.
2. Re: Why x86? by Anonymous Coward · 2015-09-17 01:22 · Score: 0
  
  Maybe ASUS want release cheap and high compatibility product :)
  http://androidsolusi.com
3. Re:Why x86? by dfghjk · 2015-09-17 01:40 · Score: 4, Interesting
  
  "The x86 architecture is very old..."
  In addition to all the stupid stuff that others have already responded to, I'll point out that ARM is also very old. It clearly upsets you that x86 competes successfully on a level playing field...but the news gets worse, your fresh architectural savior in ARM is a dinosaur as well.
4. Re:Why x86? by KiloByte · 2015-09-17 01:46 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  It's not about age in years, it's about the amount of accumulated cruft. x86 is designed for 16-bit real mode, then leftover opcodes were taken by useless 286 protected mode, then you had 32 bit protected mode crammed in, and then an unclean move to 64 bit. ARM in comparison started with clean 32 bits, and its 64-bit variant has no opcode compatibility.
  
  --
  The creatures outside looked from Alt-Right to Antifa; but already it was impossible to say which was which.
5. Re:Why x86? by Guspaz · 2015-09-17 01:57 · Score: 4, Interesting
  
  So? The instruction decoder makes up such a tiny part of a modern CPU that the instruction set is largely irrelevant in terms of efficiency.
6. Re:Why x86? by Anonymous Coward · 2015-09-17 02:08 · Score: 1
  
  PowerPC started with a clean 32-bit design as well, and it could run circles around ARM if someone would just focus some R&D resources on it. But the king of R&D is currently Intel, and they shine their spotlight on x86. Deal with it.
7. Re:Why x86? by bill_mcgonigle · 2015-09-17 02:29 · Score: 1
  
  Why are we so slavishly stuck with x86?
  Huh? Tablets are almost all ARM. This tablet is the aberration. Maybe Intel finally has their power issues worked out.
  Who cares what the ISA is if the specs are better? PC x86 also comes with more machine-support for system setup than ARM, which could help speed development, but it's not necessarily true that an x86 tablet is a PC-compatible tablet either.
  
  --
  My God, it's Full of Source!
  OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
8. Re:Why x86? by AmiMoJo · 2015-09-17 02:33 · Score: 1
  
  To be fair x86 goes right back to the early 70s. The 8086 was released in 1978, but the architecture was an extension of the 8080 (1974) which itself was an improvement on the 8008 (1972), which traced aspects of its design right back to the original 4 bit CPUs that Intel made. The architecture itself was designed to be somewhat compatible with mainframes of the day.
  x86 is fairly horrible in all regards, but it also lends itself to being very well optimized by things like out-of-order execution and conversion to microcode. ARM processors tend to be simpler and thus lower power, but Intel has been making big gains in that area by reducing their process size. It's quite incredible just how good Atom is, consider how complex it is.
  The real issue for OEMs is that Intel are the sole supplier of power efficient x86 SoCs. With ARM you have a wide selection.
  
  --
  const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
  SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
9. Re:Why x86? by LWATCDR · 2015-09-17 02:44 · Score: 1
  
  "Why are we so slavishly stuck with x86?"
  Because it works.
  Because the x86 was picked for the PC and we have bought untold millions of PCs Intel has had untold billions of dollars to spend on making the x86 very fast and pretty power efficient.
  When the pc came out the 68000 was a much better cpu and an 8Mhz Z-80 was faster.
  ARM tends to win at the low end of the scale and the x86 at the higher end.
  I find it depressing but Intel has the advantage of huge scale and profits.
  
  --
  See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
10. Re:Why x86? by Anonymous Coward · 2015-09-17 02:45 · Score: 0
  
  x86 is designed for 16-bit real mode, then leftover opcodes were taken by useless 286 protected mode, then you had 32 bit protected mode crammed in, and then an unclean move to 64 bit. ARM in comparison started with clean 32 bits, and its 64-bit variant has no opcode compatibility.
  All of which amounts to bupkis for the tablet consumer.
11. Re:Why x86? by UnknowingFool · 2015-09-17 03:04 · Score: 1
  
  "Competes successfully" is not how I would describe x86 on mobile devices. The vast majority uses ARM for a reason. While age isn't really the main problem with x86 on mobile as it is with legacy, there are huge disadvantages. Sure Intel is working on the short comings, but they have still some work to go.
  
  --
  Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
12. Re:Why x86? by UnknowingFool · 2015-09-17 03:06 · Score: 1
  
  The average consumer doesn't care about the details really. What they care about is performance and battery life which x86 is not as good as ARM in mobile devices.
  
  --
  Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
13. Re:Why x86? by Anonymous Coward · 2015-09-17 03:07 · Score: 0
  
  dell venue 11 pro 7140 core m runs full windows/linux and does a credible job virtualizing android, ami duos. thing run 9h on builtin batt add $30 keyboard + batt >14h runtime.
  i've the lwend 5y10 and it absolutely run circles around these toy tablets, both android and ios. for a light usage scenario it can't be beat.
  now cpu arches, you even amd can look down their nose at arm as far as perf goes, and intel, well core m and skylake core y are 4.6W parts. be very afraid arm fanbois.
  the asus zenfoneb2 is pretty good too. same soc and i get 2d between charges easily. felt snappier than my nexus 5 that it replaced to boot.
14. Re:Why x86? by DrXym · 2015-09-17 03:40 · Score: 1
  
  None of which matters if the cost and performance / power capabilities of the Atom processor is better than the equivalent ARM processor.
15. Re:Why x86? by phantomfive · 2015-09-17 03:47 · Score: 1
  
  So? The instruction decoder makes up such a tiny part of a modern CPU that the instruction set is largely irrelevant in terms of efficiency.
  Because it's an ugly architecture. There's more to ISA than efficiency. If we can get rid of the x86 architecture, the world will be a better place (and Intel thinks so, too, as long as they can control the new architecture).
  
  Not that ARM is particularly beautiful, it has accumulated cruft from decades, too. But at least it has a few more registers to work with.
  
  --
  "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
16. Re:Why x86? by Guspaz · 2015-09-17 04:19 · Score: 1
  
  Few developers need to have any exposure to the instruction set, especially on a platform like Android where most software is in a virtualized language like Java. There are exceptions, but the days of inline assembly are generally behind us.
17. Re:Why x86? by Anonymous Coward · 2015-09-17 04:32 · Score: 0
  
  Ugly by what measure? The market spoke and it thinks it's beautiful.
  Also: the micro-architecture of modern x86 (and even the not-so-modern ones) are basically the same as the other major CPUs (high-frequency, deep pipelines, out-of-order-completion etc).
18. Re:Why x86? by phantomfive · 2015-09-17 04:40 · Score: 1
  
  Ugly by what measure?
  
  The measure of how it feels to use it.
  
  The market spoke and it thinks it's beautiful.
  The market bought a manufacturing process. Intel's is the best.
  
  --
  "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
19. Re:Why x86? by phantomfive · 2015-09-17 04:41 · Score: 1
  
  You responded to the comment, "x86 is an ugly architecture" by saying, "most people don't have to use it." I therefore conclude that you must also think it's an ugly ISA.
  
  --
  "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
20. Re:Why x86? by macs4all · 2015-09-17 05:38 · Score: 1
  
  PowerPC started with a clean 32-bit design as well, and it could run circles around ARM if someone would just focus some R&D resources on it.
  
  You're right about that! Think of IBM's Watson. Runs on POWER architecture, IIRC. (Yes, I know it isn't quite the same as PPC; but they are certainly kissing-cousins, or variations on a common theme).
21. Re:Why x86? by macs4all · 2015-09-17 05:39 · Score: 1
  
  None of which matters if the cost and performance / power capabilities of the Atom processor is better than the equivalent ARM processor.
  Which would be great, if it were even REMOTELY true.
22. Re:Why x86? by LWATCDR · 2015-09-17 06:15 · Score: 1
  
  AMD64 is not all that x86 like and that is the isa most people use today. The old 16 bit stuff is just a tiny bit of cruft for backwards compatibility.
  
  --
  See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
23. Re:Why x86? by Anonymous Coward · 2015-09-17 07:21 · Score: 0
  
  None of which matters if the cost and performance / power capabilities of the Atom processor is better than the equivalent ARM processor.
  Which would be great, if it were even REMOTELY true.
  I'm sure that using Android-anything is below your dignity, so you wouldn't know firsthand, but in actual reality Intel- and ARM-based tablets in the same price class have comparable performance and battery life. Yes, Intel is subsidizing SoC costs in order to push its tech. Yes, there isn't as much choice in Intel-land. But the difference isn't astronomic anymore.
  captcha: modern
24. Re:Why x86? by Guspaz · 2015-09-17 08:21 · Score: 1
  
  That wasn't my intent, my intent was to indicate that, for most developers, the ISA is completely irrelevant. It can be ugly or beautiful and they'll never need to know or care. If ISA mattered, we'd all be using MIPS.
25. Re:Why x86? by Anonymous Coward · 2015-09-17 08:32 · Score: 0
  
  Some applications use low-level x86 assembly and an x86 processor makes using them a lot easier. Specifically, I've thinking of an emulator like ZSNES (of course, no one's actually ported it, so...).
26. Re:Why x86? by macs4all · 2015-09-17 09:49 · Score: 1
  
  None of which matters if the cost and performance / power capabilities of the Atom processor is better than the equivalent ARM processor.
  Which would be great, if it were even REMOTELY true.
  I'm sure that using Android-anything is below your dignity, so you wouldn't know firsthand, but in actual reality Intel- and ARM-based tablets in the same price class have comparable performance and battery life. Yes, Intel is subsidizing SoC costs in order to push its tech. Yes, there isn't as much choice in Intel-land. But the difference isn't astronomic anymore.
  captcha: modern
  Although I'm first to admit that I am an unabashed Apple-snob, who washes his hands anytime I've had to so much as touch an Android phone (I kid, really!), I really am NOT a CPU-snob, and so, if Intel can wake up and smell the silicon, so much the better for everyone.
  
  Afterall, since iOS, like OS X, is likely pretty processor-agnostic, if Intel gets to looking better than what Apple can design themselves, they may actually switch to Intel for their mobile products as well. I'm SURE Intel would fall over backwards to give Apple SPECTACULAR pricing on their SoCs, don'tcha know?
27. Re:Why x86? by Anne+Thwacks · 2015-09-17 10:25 · Score: 1
  
  The 8080 owed very little to the 8008 (yes I have written assembler for both). They were completely unrelated to the 8086, but are distantly related to the 8085.
  The 8086 was a very poor attempt at a PDP11 clone - deliberately bad enough to avoid patent suits.
  You are confused by the 8088 (after all, that is what it was there for). The 8088 was an 8086 with an 8 bit external bus to keep the pin count and peripheral cost down. Assembler for the 8086 was far more painful, and it has only got worse with the advent of Pentium, etc. No one writes assembler for 8086 derivatives now (except the minimum needed to initialise the machine). It is far too painful.
  ARM stood for "Acorn Risc Machine" and was designed by Acorn, who made the BBC micro - kind of like Apple had designed their own CPU after the success of the Apple ][. People write ARM assembler in the same way that people get gored by bulls in Spain.
  
  --
  Sent from my ASR33 using ASCII
28. Re:Why x86? by Anne+Thwacks · 2015-09-17 10:26 · Score: 1
  
  I have a slightly used shift key if you need one. See my ebay listings.
  
  --
  Sent from my ASR33 using ASCII
29. Re:Why x86? by DrXym · 2015-09-17 23:23 · Score: 1
  
  The Antutu scores for the Atom chips are out there and they're not out of line with similar chips. Indeed, Asus already use the chip in their $229 Zenfone 2 and it has a pretty decent performance for that price range. My biggest reason to not buy this particular tablet has less to do with the CPU and what I've read about ZenUI.
Nothing to do with layziness by danbob999 · 2015-09-17 01:17 · Score: 2, Informative

But, then again, I guess this allows everybody to be lazy and just reuse the same architecture they've had for decades and slowly turn the tablets back into low end desktops for no good reason.
Asus could have used ARM just as easily. They chose Intel because they thought it was the best SoC for their needs, not because of the legacy x86 compatibility. Nobody is going to install DOS or Windows on these.
1. Re:Nothing to do with layziness by Anonymous Coward · 2015-09-17 01:47 · Score: 0
  
  You're so certain but totally incorrect, there will most certainly be a Windows variant of this tablet. ASUS is fairly big on that ecosystem.
2. Re:Nothing to do with layziness by danbob999 · 2015-09-17 02:16 · Score: 1
  
  It might be a variant of the tablet, or may be a different tablet. In all cases, they could have used ARM Android on this one if they wanted to.
3. Re:Nothing to do with layziness by Spazmania · 2015-09-17 04:25 · Score: 1
  
  Actually, one of the things I really like about my ASUS tablet is that I was able copy an existing x86 Linux into a chroot on the microsd card. And then sling binaries back and forth between that and my x86 servers and VMs.
  
  --
  Moderating "-1, Disagree" is simple censorship. Have the guts to post your opinion.
4. Re:Nothing to do with layziness by macs4all · 2015-09-17 05:32 · Score: 0
  
  Asus could have used ARM just as easily. They chose Intel because they thought it was the best SoC for their needs, not because of the legacy x86 compatibility. Nobody is going to install DOS or Windows on these.
  Then, pray tell, what the FUCK ARE they going to install? Linux? Yeahrightsure.
  
  And does Android even run on x86? How many APPS are there for that variant?
  
  This actually seems like a VERY lame product. Who cares about hardware specs if there is no App-support?
5. Re:Nothing to do with layziness by danbob999 · 2015-09-17 05:49 · Score: 1
  
  While it's a cool feature for you, you are in that 0.001% of the users doing that. I don't think Asus even considered this use case when they designed the tablet.
6. Re:Nothing to do with layziness by danbob999 · 2015-09-17 05:51 · Score: 1
  
  I wasn't expecting someone who's username is mac4all to know that, but yes, Android does run on x86 and all java apps should work. Only some apps are written in C and compiled for ARM.
  So app-support is a non-issue.
7. Re:Nothing to do with layziness by macs4all · 2015-09-17 06:44 · Score: 1
  
  I wasn't expecting someone who's username is mac4all to know that, but yes, Android does run on x86 and all java apps should work. Only some apps are written in C and compiled for ARM. So app-support is a non-issue.
  
  I wasn't expecting someone who's username is mac4all to know that, but yes, Android does run on x86 and all java apps should work. Only some apps are written in C and compiled for ARM. So app-support is a non-issue.
  Ad hominem bullshit aside, I am sure I can spout plenty of OS X and iOS facts that would "stump" a Fandroid; but I thought that Dalvik != Java; but now you're saying that there is magical App compatibility between Dalvik Apps and Java Apps? So there is the concept of "Black Box Dalvik" (pure Dalvik), just like "Black Box Java" (pure Java)? If so, how many times does THAT happen?!?
  
  So, why can't I run Android Apps on OS X (assuming I have downloaded that dangerous OS), or Windows (again, assuming Java Support has been installed)?
  
  Because there's (MUCH!) more to it than simple Language Compatibility (or even bytecode compatibility); because almost NO ONE codes in "Pure Java", that's why! And, from what (admittedly) little I know about Java development, it seems like there is ALWAYS at least SOME "platform-specific" stuff in Java Apps. So cut the crap, will ya?!?
8. Re:Nothing to do with layziness by Anonymous Coward · 2015-09-17 07:06 · Score: 0
  
  And does Android even run on x86? How many APPS are there for that variant?
  This actually seems like a VERY lame product. Who cares about hardware specs if there is no App-support?
  Your question sounds trollish (I mean, Intel-based tablets running Android didn't appear yesterday), but giving you a benefit of doubt: yes, Android/x86 is a thing. Has been for a couple of years already. Intel knows that desktop is a dwindling market as well as anybody else, so they have been working on mobile SoCs for a while.
  As for app support, anything written in Java works effortlessly. There is SDK support for relatively painless x86 targeting if a developer wished to produce an Intel-specific version. If all else fails, Android/x86 has on-the-fly ARM emulation (cf. Rosetta for a similar approach) which works pretty well. All of this means that non-working apps are an exception these days.
9. Re:Nothing to do with layziness by khellendros1984 · 2015-09-17 08:04 · Score: 1
  
  Dalvik runs code compiled from Java, but Dalvik bytecode isn't compatible with JVM bytecode. It was also replaced in 5.0 with ART, which recompiles software into native architecture code. Software that needs native code (games that include C libraries, for instance) generally have builds for multiple architectures available.
  
  So, why can't I run Android Apps on OS X (assuming I have downloaded that dangerous OS), or Windows (again, assuming Java Support has been installed)?
  Because you haven't head of BlueStacks? Or possibly the apps you want to run don't run stably in that environment. Back to Java: Java's just a language. It can be compiled to bytecode for various VMs (or even to native code), and the language itself doesn't guarantee compatibility between those VMs. Another example: If I write a library in C and compile it on GNU/Linux, it will use glibc as the C library. If I compile it for Android/Linux, it will use Bionic as the C library. Same language, same OS kernel, different environments built on top of them.
  
  --
  It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
10. Re:Nothing to do with layziness by Spazmania · 2015-09-17 08:51 · Score: 1
  
  You don't think the engineers and software developers who designed ASUS' android tablets considered running general-purpose Linux on them? It never crossed the minds of that particular subset of the general population?
  
  --
  Moderating "-1, Disagree" is simple censorship. Have the guts to post your opinion.
11. Re:Nothing to do with layziness by macs4all · 2015-09-17 09:44 · Score: 1
  
  Intel knows that desktop is a dwindling market as well as anybody else, so they have been working on mobile SoCs for a while.
  
  No, Intel knows that ARM is whipping their ASS in the Mobile Market, and so is trying to die-shrink themselves into relevance in that market.
  
  As for app support, anything written in Java works effortlessly.
  Maybe so; but then, it's still JAVA. Isn't there a REASON why people have FLED from Java on the Desktop? Why repeat history?
  
  Maybe I'm crazy; but, IMHO, C, C++, ObjC and now Swift sounds a LOT better than Java, or even worse, EMULATED ARMs running Dalvik...
12. Re:Nothing to do with layziness by danbob999 · 2015-09-17 09:45 · Score: 1
  
  Again, that is 0.01% of their target market. So no, they do not care.
So Asus can make a Windoze version by Anonymous Coward · 2015-09-17 01:21 · Score: 2, Interesting

I assume its so that Asus can swap the OS and make a Windows version cheaply in small quantities. Doing so they qualify for the return of their patent fees for Microsofts 'inventions'.
(We learned that Samsungs settlement for Microsoft 'Patent' lawsuit was a fake payment, which was waived as long as Samsung got made Windows phones too, and when they stopped making Windows phones, Microsoft sued them for patent license fees).
I also suspect Intel gives them a price cut on PC x86 chips if they use x86 in tablets and phones because only PC makers use these x86 chips, as if there's an incentive to use them thats only available to PC makers who use Intels other x86 chips. But that would be monopoly abuse, and Intel would never do that... again... no sir.... certainly not a serial offender....
Mojokid = hothardware by Anonymous Coward · 2015-09-17 01:29 · Score: 0

If I wanted to read hot hardware I'd go read it. I don't know why a individual product review counts as news.
Literally nothing to see here by Anonymous Coward · 2015-09-17 01:30 · Score: 3, Interesting

This is a slashvertisment, please move along.
Compare the Specs then ! by Anonymous Coward · 2015-09-17 01:33 · Score: 0

If I was going to write an article stating "X boast better specs in many areas than Y", then I would list the specs of X and Y and compare them.
FFS.
I'm looking for something with a larger screen by Mr.+Droopy+Drawers · 2015-09-17 01:35 · Score: 2

Very happy with my Samsung 12.1 Galaxy Note Pro. But, they've discontinued it. Will Apple be the only offering this form factor? Or does it take them to legitimatize the 12" screen size?

--
To Copy from One is Plagiarism; To Copy from Many is Research.
1. Re:I'm looking for something with a larger screen by AmiMoJo · 2015-09-17 02:39 · Score: 1
  
  Microsoft, Dell, Acer and others all still do 12" tablets. Lots of other manufacturers support the 12" form factor, it's just Samsung that hasn't updated last year's model for some reason.
  
  --
  const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
  SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
2. Re:I'm looking for something with a larger screen by Mr.+Droopy+Drawers · 2015-09-17 03:52 · Score: 1
  
  Guess I should state that I like it running Android. The others are running various versions of Windows...
  
  --
  To Copy from One is Plagiarism; To Copy from Many is Research.
The the ipad comparison by DougOtto · 2015-09-17 01:37 · Score: 2

I get a chuckle every time either side of the droid/apple ecosystem does an "X sucks" and then follows it up with "this Y has specs just as good as X!" comparison.

So they both suck?

--
Solving Unix problems since 1989...
Site issues? by Nidi62 · 2015-09-17 01:40 · Score: 5, Insightful

Hey Slashdot, I think your ads disabled checkbox is broken.

--
The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
Silly comparison by 0123456 · 2015-09-17 01:42 · Score: 1, Interesting

1, The iPad Mini 3 is about to be replaced by the iPad Mini 4.
2. It runs Android or Windows, which both need better hardware specs than IOS.
3. It runs Android or Windows. In the former case, it's a security nightmare that the manufacturer will probably stop supporting in a year or so, and, in the latter, it's a privacy nightmare.
1. Re:Silly comparison by Anonymous Coward · 2015-09-17 02:20 · Score: 0
  
  Yeah that was my thought. Why are they comparing a new ASUS device against last year's model iPad mini and saying how great it is? Pathetic
2. Re:Silly comparison by Anonymous Coward · 2015-09-17 02:24 · Score: 0
  
  The processor in the ASUS device is also more than a year old. I guess that's why they're comparing it to the iPad mini 3 and not the current one. Still a bit behind the curve for a new device.
3. Re:Silly comparison by DrXym · 2015-09-17 03:49 · Score: 1
  
  Android needs better hardware specs than an iPad? Interesting. As for Windows, it *might* be a security issue if you use your tablet as a Windows desktop instead of just apps from the app store. Then again, being able to run a full desktop from a tablet is a pretty useful thing on occasion. Even just installing a printer driver on a Windows tablet is far simpler and more apps print properly than some of the bullshit that iOS or Android puts you through.
4. Re:Silly comparison by macs4all · 2015-09-17 05:45 · Score: 1
  
  Then again, being able to run a full desktop from a tablet is a pretty useful thing on occasion.
  That's what VNC and RDP is for. Or don't you own a computer and an internet connection? Do you need help setting up a VPN?
5. Re:Silly comparison by DrXym · 2015-09-17 06:53 · Score: 1
  
  I see. So even though a Windows tablet is entirely capable of being a full desktop in its own right, to take into an office or hotel and do real work, you think it's that RDP is an adequate replacement.
6. Re:Silly comparison by macs4all · 2015-09-17 09:36 · Score: 1
  
  I see. So even though a Windows tablet is entirely capable of being a full desktop in its own right, to take into an office or hotel and do real work, you think it's that RDP is an adequate replacement.
  With an adequate internet connection and possibly a bluetooth keyboard (which would benefit the Windows tablet, too), sure. Done it many times with my iPad. And with the new iPad Pro, it's pretty much a no-brainer.
7. Re:Silly comparison by DrXym · 2015-09-17 19:06 · Score: 1
  
  I take my tablet (which has a keyboard dock) to Spain, Portugal, the USA and I don't particularly relish leaving a PC on in my house for 2 or 3 weeks. I don't relish having to set up remote access to it through a firewall, or making the assumption that I have internet at all in order to access it.
  And why should I when my tablet is a PC? I can take my work with me. I can write software (my profession), or play a game or just use it like a tablet. It's a thoroughly impractical idea to suggest use RDP instead.
Buy a Product Because it is "Cheap"? by BoRegardless · 2015-09-17 01:44 · Score: 1

Throw the submitter under the bus.
1. Re:Buy a Product Because it is "Cheap"? by andrewbaldwin · 2015-09-17 02:23 · Score: 1
  
  Spare the submitter.....
  TL;DR - Cheap is not always pejorative
  This is possibly a difference between English and American
  Americans view cheap as implying poor quality. Something cheaply made implies cutting back and using lowest cost components.
  This meaning also exists in English but it usually just means low cost. "Cheap and cheerful" means low cost but generally equivalent to higher priced items.
2. Re:Buy a Product Because it is "Cheap"? by gstoddart · 2015-09-17 02:39 · Score: 2
  
  No, really. For some of us it's a factor.
  I don't want some $500 tablet, I want a relatively cheaper tablet which has enough specs to do what I need without trying to be bleeding edge.
  For some of us, the $200 price point is the sweet spot, it's not a super low end piece of garbage, but it's not a super high end thing we don't need with features we don't want.
  That was pretty much how I ended up with my Nexus 7. It was right in the $199-$219 price range when I bought it, was a 'vanilla' Android, and covered what I needed it for.
  Contrast that with, say, an unlocked Nexus phone these days .. which is, what, a $600 unit? Sorry, don't need one of those. An iPad mini 4 looks like it starts at over $400 where I am, and then goes up from there. That's a lot of money for what I want it for.
  The affordable end of the market is probably larger than the "latest and greatest" end.
  My mother in law has a Nexus 7 which she uses for everything she needs a computer for -- and she'd never spend $500 or so on a device. Never in a million years. And for a tablet, neither would I.
  
  --
  Lost at C:>. Found at C.
ASUS tends to abandon hardware quickly by Dzimas · 2015-09-17 02:00 · Score: 4, Insightful

I have an ASUS Memo Pad 10 FHD, that has served me pretty well for just over a year. My one complaint is that the company stopped supporting it way too early (it's running Android 4.3), and this seems to be standard practice. My next tablet will be Nexus or Apple, simply because that should provide me with 2-3 years of OS updates. That little bonus is worth an extra $100 or so to me.
1. Re:ASUS tends to abandon hardware quickly by gstoddart · 2015-09-17 03:05 · Score: 2
  
  That was how I ended up with the Nexus.
  It wasn't full of proprietary crap, and was likely to be supported the longest possible.
  I expect to get a couple of years out of the device, and have no desire to chase the latest and greatest.
  I also don't want the additional crap from whatever vendor has decided to reinvent the wheel/try to monetize my experience.
  
  --
  Lost at C:>. Found at C.
2. Re:ASUS tends to abandon hardware quickly by SuiteSisterMary · 2015-09-17 07:36 · Score: 1
  
  My iPad 3 updated quite happily to iOS 9 today. It was released in 2012 running iOS 5.1.
  
  --
  Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
But does it run Linux? by Eunuchswear · 2015-09-17 02:13 · Score: 1

Seriously, can you replace android with a real (glibc) based linux?

--
Watch this Heartland Institute video
1. Re:But does it run Linux? by danbob999 · 2015-09-17 02:19 · Score: 1
  
  Probably. But even without replacing it, you can install most command line linux programs anyways. Either directly on inside a chroot
2. Re:But does it run Linux? by Anonymous Coward · 2015-09-17 02:41 · Score: 0
  
  Yes, but that can also be done with almost any ARM Android tablet (assuming you can root it etc.).
  Also, the PowerVR GPU in this thing is a PITA if you want to run different kernels/userspace, again just like many ARM Android tablets.
Specs Specs Specs by goombah99 · 2015-09-17 02:40 · Score: 1, Insightful

Why is it people insist on comparing apples to oranges with specs. People buy apple because they are easy to use, highly productive, platforms with a balance of specs. You can always buy something cheaper-- always-- if you cherry pick the specs as your comparison point. This makes sense if you are running a headless server in the dark or running an optimized gaming machine or treating the device as an appliance to control your robot or home securilty system. Otherwise it makes no sense. Apple is very competitive on the total package and the difference in price rarely matters if your time has any value. Buy what's right for you but don't tell me some fine grained spec comparison. otherwise I'll tell you that five orange-Pi computers at $9 each lashed together in a beowulf cluster smokes an ipad too.

--
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
1. Re:Specs Specs Specs by Anonymous Coward · 2015-09-17 02:59 · Score: 1
  
  no people buy apple junk because they're drinking the koolaid and/or want a fashion accessory.
  apple specs are only decent in mobile. in notebooks and desktops they're ripoff artists for such incredibly anemic specs. only the topend pro was a very slight value when it first came out(most recent iteration) now it's just like the rest of their lineup of yawners. even worse as they turned the pro into a fashion accessory as well, making it difficult at best to upgrade simple things and impossible for gfx.
  having tried recent macbook pro and osx it's damned pokey on apple hw and even on significantly better hackintosh hw it's not nearly as speedy as it should be. very little seems to changed since tiger and feels much more like the 'upgrades' were the fashion accessory of the year ui skinning.
2. Re:Specs Specs Specs by UnknowingFool · 2015-09-17 03:48 · Score: 1
  
  Interestingly in the area of processors is where Apple has the opposite approach of commodity. They design their processors specifically for their devices rather than use off-the-shelf ones.
  
  --
  Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
3. Re:Specs Specs Specs by macs4all · 2015-09-17 05:27 · Score: 1
  
  no people buy apple junk because they're drinking the koolaid and/or want a fashion accessory.
  You're absolutely right! You said:
  
  NO people buy apple "junk" because they're drinking the koolaid and/or want a fashion accessory.
  
  Oh, what a difference a comma WOULD have made; but you're too filled with Apple hate to even compose a grammatically-correct insult, slashtard!
4. Re:Specs Specs Specs by Anonymous Coward · 2015-09-17 09:54 · Score: 0
  
  Attacks on spelling and grammar are the lowest of the low.
  You contribute nothing to the world and it would improve without you.
What? by Anonymous Coward · 2015-09-17 02:55 · Score: 0

1. Why are you comparing Apples to Oranges?
2. The iPad runs it's own proprietary OS (like Android if you will), it's not meant to be compared to an X86 computer/tablet
3. ASUS tablets, weather x86, or ARM are HORRIBLE from a repair point of view. The parts all have different revisions (transformer tablet anyone?), of which none of them are compatible with one another. So from my point of view, ASUS tablet are junk.
4. Why are you comparing the performance of an x86 tablet to an ARM based one? There is no point. ARM is built for efficiency. X86 was originally built for performance. It's like comparing a Fiat to a Lexus.
Overall just a dumb article.
Not really.. by edxwelch · 2015-09-17 03:45 · Score: 1

Asus used Intel because they got the SoC for practically free, thanks to Intels contra-revenue scheme.
1. Re:Not really.. by danbob999 · 2015-09-17 04:00 · Score: 1
  
  maybe, but again it has nothing to do with the instruction set.
DOES IT RUN PURE LINUX? by floon · 2015-09-17 03:54 · Score: 1

If not, I don't care about any android tablet.
x86 has lost on the level field. by SuperKendall · 2015-09-17 04:36 · Score: 1

"It clearly upsets you that x86 competes successfully on a level playing field."
In what way is that so? iPad (ARM) sales still trounce all x86 tablet sales, even when the x86 tablets ship with more memory and so on.
Plainly x86 cannot really compete on a truly level playing field.

--
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Now with New and Improved Password Vulnerabilty! by macs4all · 2015-09-17 05:22 · Score: 1

in addition to running the latest version of Android Lollipop.
Hahahahahaha!

That is all.
Seriously tho... by txoutback · 2015-09-17 05:29 · Score: 1

All complaints about OS, rooting, browsers, privacy aside... this is a really nice tablet for the price... and this holiday season (or next) it will be a steal.
Atom again by Tough+Love · 2015-09-17 05:44 · Score: 1

I have always regretted purchasing any device with an Atom in it, and I was stupid enough to do it more than once. Always the wrong combination of hot and slow. Did Intel finally get it right this time? I seriously doubt it.

--
When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
No mobile data by nicolaiplum · 2015-09-17 10:25 · Score: 1

There is no mobile data option in the specs on Asus' website
No good if you want a stand-alone mobile data terminal.

--
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled"