Why the Android, Windows & Apple Tablets so different

[AJKock]

Wasn't too sure about where to ask this questions, so please feel free to move it to appropriate section.

Why is it that Windows tablets doesn't even come close to the specs of the Android or iPad tablets? And before you starting bashing Microsoft, remember manufacturers make the tablets, not Microsoft.

For example:

Motorola Xoom: 10" Dual core Tegra with 720P video recording, 5MP camera and +-10 hours battery life, wifi, 3G (Android) - R9,000

Asus Eee Slate: 12" LED, Core i5 1.3GHz, Intel HD graphics, 2MP camera, +- 3 hours battery life, wireless (Win 7 64bit) - R11,300

And this is the best spec Win tablet I could find. The rest just gets worse.

 

[Elimentals]

Say in the car world you want to move 1 ton anvil

Microsoft tablet:
Toyota Hilux with a truck engine mounted in the back and a trailer hooked on behind it so that you can move the 1 ton anvil.

Android tablet:
3L Toyota Hilux to move the one ton anvil with a sticky clutch

iPad
2L Toyota Hilux with the engine hood welded shut and spray painted by an art student.

OK enough of car analogies
Microsoft tablets are actually pc's in tablet form, sure they can act like a tablet and you can use them to do more, but it is not really the best device for that purpose. Windows was designed from ground up to be a desktop, with a mouse and keyboard interface as primary input.

Where Android and iPad are designed from the ground up for that form factor, from the processors to the touch interface.

 

[AJKock]

I understand the differences in the OS, I just don't understand the cost of associated hardware features.

 

[Elimentals]

I understand the differences in the OS, I just don't understand the cost of associated hardware features.

Comes down to Architecture for example read this. In short x86 is just a CPU you need to add other components where the others are an entire system on a chip. You can replace ARM with say Snapdragon or A4 its still holds the same. If you truly want to understand the difference I would recommend reading the wiki's of each:

Apple A4 Purpose build, limited scale and flexibility
Android Snapdragon Purpose build, limited scale and flexibility
Microsoft x86 Modular, scalable, flexible.

 

[CrazYmonkeY159]

Comes down to Architecture for example read this. In short x86 is just a CPU you need to add other components where the others are an entire system on a chip. You can replace ARM with say Snapdragon or A4 its still holds the same. If you truly want to understand the difference I would recommend reading the wiki's of each:

Apple A4 Purpose build, limited scale and flexibility
Android Snapdragon Purpose build, limited scale and flexibility
Microsoft x86 Modular, scalable, flexible.

not entirely true

When one talks about ARM, its usually (loosely used) to mean both its instruction set or processor depending on the context, so just to be clear when you hear me say ARM in my next paragraph, I mean the instruction set.

All intel chips run on x86/x64 instruction sets, these are CISC instructions, by in large it is generally more of a power hungry instruction set (which is why ARM is the market leader for mobile or embedded devices) now ARMs instruction set are RISC instructions, generally far more efficient than x86/x64 in terms of power consumption. remember I am only talking about power consumption here, lets not get into a CISC vs RISC bible fight.

In my next paragraph when i talk about ARM im talking about the physical CPUs themselves not the instruction set

Texas Instrument's OMAP, nVidia's Tegra 2, Apple's A4/A5, Qualcomm's Snapdragon's Run ontop of ARM, they are purpose built like Elimentals said, They are a System on Chip. ie support for GSM signal processing, bluetooth processing yadayadayada are enabled by what features exist/dont exist on the SoC.

 

[AJKock]

Is it possible to get Windows to work with nVidia's Tegra chipsets?

 

[Synaesthesia]

No, Windows only works on x86, not ARM based.

The gist of the question is answered by the following:
Power Consumption of ARM CPU - About 0W idle, about 1W max. (for the whole SOC)
Power Consumption of Intel Atom - About 2-14W (for the whole chipset)
Power Consumption of Intel Core 2 Duo mobile - About 5-35W.

Of course ARM is much slower than Intel CPU's, even Atom. It's thanks to optimized OS'es like Android or iOS that we still have smooth experiences on them. (or you could say Windows is unoptimized)

 

[CrazYmonkeY159]

there have been rumors of Microsoft leaning towards ARM development in the consumer space

the only Microsoft product which runs on ARM is Windows CE, which isnt suitable for mobile handsets, its more suitable for other mobile applications (HTPCs, Complex embedded devices).

 

[AJKock]

Thanks guys for the information. Just on one point CrazYmonkeY159, "Tegra is a chip that combines an ARM processor CPU, a mobile GeForce GPU, northbridge, southbridge and memory controller into a single package."

From what I can read online, the Tegra chip is "better" (vastly superior battery life) than the Atom chip. The Tegra 2 also appears to be more powerful, not even to speak of the Tegra Quad coming out later this year. The Zune HD appears to be using a Tegra chip.

 

[CrazYmonkeY159]

yes the Tegra chips are by far the more exiting of the chips, nvidia even released thier own game suite for all tegra 2 chips (I assume that these games take advantage of some native tegra 2 feature)

By in large its still quite early to say if Tegra 2 can slay the snapdragon but sofar it is, we just gotta wait for Qualcomms dual core offerings

 

[AJKock]

By the time Qualcomms has dual core offerings, the Quad will be out (supposedly in Nov 2011).

 

[Jonno2343]

Say in the car world you want to move 1 ton anvil

Microsoft tablet:
Toyota Hilux with a truck engine mounted in the back and a trailer hooked on behind it so that you can move the 1 ton anvil.

Android tablet:
3L Toyota Hilux to move the one ton anvil with a sticky clutch

iPad
2L Toyota Hilux with the engine hood welded shut and spray painted by an art student.

OK enough of car analogies
Microsoft tablets are actually pc's in tablet form, sure they can act like a tablet and you can use them to do more, but it is not really the best device for that purpose. Windows was designed from ground up to be a desktop, with a mouse and keyboard interface as primary input.

Where Android and iPad are designed from the ground up for that form factor, from the processors to the touch interface.

Haha, that's a great analogy!



In terms of raw computing power, the Eee Slate blows the other guys far out of the water. It uses an i5 processor, way way faster than a Tegra.
Battery life is terrible though and that is because it's basically laptop components stuffed into something half the size of a laptop (especially in battery department).
I have the HP Touchsmart TM2 and it is absolutely fantastic in what it can do. Sure, the UI is nowhere near as good as the others for touch but the raw possibilities (Office, COD:BlackOps, etc) that it has are excellent.
I still think that a tablet NEEDS to have a stylus input before it can become any form of a laptop replacement. You should use your fingers for interaction with the UI but then a stylus for hand-writing recognition, etc.
I use OneNote on my TM2 and it is excellent, wouldn't be able to take notes on paper ever again

When Windows 8 comes out and we see the ARM SoC support, then Microsoft's offering will be a lot more appealing to the general market. Imagine the WP7 interface for your slate format but still with a full computer operating system behind it? Aahh..