Tag Archives: Android

Samsung’s Galaxy Camera Is The Camera Of The Future [Review] Popsci

By Dan Bracaglia and Dan Nosowitz

Dan Nosowitz: I wasn’t optimistic about the Samsung Galaxy Camera. The idea of a camera with a big touchscreen and a full version of Android, complete with 4G LTE connection, is enticing, but I do not care much at all for Samsung’s other Galaxy products, which to this point have just been smartphones and tablets. I find their hardware chintzy and their software difficult and confused, as the company insists on mucking up Android (which is really great!) with their slow and bloated skins. Yet to my surprise, the Galaxy Camera is by far my favorite product in the Galaxy line.

As an Android device, it’s got pretty much the same guts as a modern Galaxy smartphone. That means a huge 4.8-inch screen, a quad-core processor, a Samsung-ified version of Android 4.1 Jelly Bean, and 4G LTE connectivity. It even has a microphone, intended to be used while taking video, so theoretically you could ditch your phone, make calls with a VoIP service or Google Voice, and use this as your exclusive camera/phone. And of course it has access to the entire Android app store, which has fairly recently been renamed Google Play. But this is not a Galaxy smartphone with an improved camera; this is a high-end Samsung point-and-shoot with Android.

Image
Using the Galaxy: Performance is pretty good; it’s not as fast getting around as the screamingly-fast Nexus 4, but it’s certainly not laggy. Android 4.1 is very nice; the Galaxy Camera has all the benefits of Google Now and all kinds of other great Android stuff. The screen is not the best screen I’ve ever used (not quite as sharp as the iPhone 5 or Nokia Lumia 920), but it is a very good screen, and it is definitely the best screen I’ve ever used on a camera. I think 4.8 inches is too big for a phone, but man is it awesome on a camera. You can actually share photos with a group on this thing!
Samsung’s software is, as always, annoying. It’s not as in-your-face with a million new gestures and pop-ups and buzzword-y features that plague its Galaxy S III and Galaxy Note smartphones. It’s not wildly different from stock Android but aside from the camera interface, there’s not a single thing I like better about the changes Samsung’s made. Even the soft buttons (Menu, Home, Back) work differently on this phone than on other Android devices. Why? And the keyboard I think is pretty poor (autocorrect is unhelpful, word recognition isn’t good), though it’s very easy to download a new keyboard from Google Play.

Image

It’s only a little awkward to use as an Android device; I’m not sure exactly how to hold it, as it’s thicker than a regular Android phone and also has the lens mount protruding. Dan Bracaglia’s solution left his finger sitting on the little door in from of the lens–not good, since that door is notorious on compact cameras for breaking or locking up, rendering the camera useless. But it’s not that hard, and I found it pretty capable for browsing Twitter or the web, checking email, and doing most other things you’d do on a smartphone. And that’s kind of an achievement in itself; this isn’t a skimped, shitty version of Android–it’s high-end, just like on a top-tier phone.

Image

I think the camera interface is great; the new stock camera app on Android is innovative and excellent in its own right, but it doesn’t offer as many manual controls, so I think Samsung’s camera app is a perfect solution for a more capable camera. For someone who’s not an expert photographer, I really loved how Samsung guides the user through the app. And everything is done on the touchscreen; the only buttons are a shutter, a zoom toggle, and a flash trigger. That’s great for novices who are much more comfortable with navigating menus on a smartphone than navigating the airplane-cockpit-like controls of a DSLR. Everything’s right out in the open: you don’t have to guess at what a switch means, because it’s spelled out on the screen.

The sharing options are easy and intuitive; when you look through photos, the top bar gives you sharing options, and it places your most recently used sharing option in its own little spot up there. For me, that means posting to Instagram is a one-tap affair, right from the camera app. Love it.

Image quality for me is kind of an interesting beast. It will take, without question, the best Instagram photos of any device that actually has Instagram on it. (Yes, I know you can take photos with a DSLR and post them to Instagram. But that’s not really what Instagram is about.) It’s no question that the Galaxy Camera takes better shots than any smartphone I’ve ever used.

Imagex

Size: But the camera is too big. For me, a camera’s physical size is second only to image quality as the most important element, and then only barely second. The Galaxy Camera is not pocketable. (I do wear skinny-ish jeans, but I can’t imagine what kind of pockets could comfortably hold it.) I actually like the hardware design a lot; it’s all plastic, but, unlike Galaxy smartphones, doesn’t feel cheap at all. It feels really well-constructed, sturdily and simply designed without getting too basic. It’s one of the most attractive gadgets Samsung’s ever made, frankly, but I would much rather it had a slightly smaller screen in return for a smaller footprint. Dan Bracaglia noted that the weight also has the benefit of stabilizing the camera; light cameras can sometimes move around too much, and he thinks Samsung “nailed” the weight.

That size means I have the camera in my bag rather than my pocket. When I’m out and about and see something I want to shoot, it’s just faster and easier to snag my phone out of my pocket than fish around in my bag. And unlike a DSLR, which takes photos that are in a completely different league than my phone, the Galaxy Camera is merely “better” than my phone. I found myself not always bothering; if I can get a B- photo with my phone, who cares about a B+ photo from the Galaxy Camera? It’s not like I’m going for an A-level photo from my DSLR.

Price: And that brings us to the most salient point in this whole review: who is the Galaxy Camera for? Its image quality is not wildly improved from a nice $200 point-and-shoot, though it is certainly a superior product, thanks to its connectivity, interface, and bonus access to all of Android. At $500, the camera is right at the very top of the price pyramid for compacts; in fact, for that price, you could snag any of several very nice mirrorless interchangeable-lens cameras from Sony, Olympus, or Panasonic, or even a low-end DSLR like last year’s Nikon D3100. All of those cameras would thoroughly trounce the Galaxy Camera on image quality, but they’re also less capable in a lot of ways.

In Conclusion: What’s most interesting about the Galaxy Camera is how obvious it now is that this is what consumer cameras will look like in the future. A mirrorless camera with interchangeable lenses but with this kind of connectivity and interface? That would be amazing. It’s so much easier and faster to use for non-professionals than the more traditional camera control schemes, and the sharing options are the wave of the present and future. Of course you should be able to instantly upload photos to the cloud, to Facebook and Twitter and Instagram, to email them to your friends and family, to edit them in a mobile version of Photoshop. The Galaxy Camera isn’t quite right for most people, but it’s so close. Someone’s going to do this right, and soon, so let’s just consider the Galaxy Camera a sneak preview.

For Full Review please read the post on popular science article link : http://www.popsci.com/gadgets/article/2012-12/samsung-galaxy-camera-review

Google Nexus 7vs iPad mini.

Apple iPad mini Google Nexus 7
Operating system iOS 6 Android 4.1
Price Wi-Fi: $329 (16GB), $429 (32GB), $529 (64GB). Cellular: $459 (16GB), $559 (32GB), $659 (64GB). $199 (16GB), $249 (32GB), $299 (32GB and HSPA+)
Release date November 2, 2012, for Wi-Fi; cellular 2 weeks later July 13, 2012
Display 7.9-inch IPS, 1,024×768 pixels (163 ppi) 7-inch IPS, 1,280×800 pixels (216 ppi)
Size 7.9 inches x 5.3 inches x 0.28 inch 7.8 inches x 4.7 inches x 0.41 inch
Weight 0.68 pound/308 grams (0.69 pound for cellular) 0.75 pound/340 grams
Processor Dual-core A5 processor Quad-core Nvidia Tegra 3
Memory 16GB, 32GB, or 64GB 8GB or 16GB; 1GB RAM
Camera 5-megapixel rear-facing, 1080p HD video; 1.2-megapixel front-facing camera, 720 HD video 1.2-megapixel front-facing
Battery “16.3-watt-hour”; 10 hours battery life (rated) 4,325mAh; 10.1 hours video battery life (tested)
NFC No Yes
Extras 4G LTE versions available Tegra games, HSPA+ version available
Ports Lightning connector Micro-USB
Color Black, white Black

Google Nexus 7 The $200 Tablet.

Image

NEW YORK: In the 1982 sci-fi movie “Blade Runner,” there are hints that the hero, played by Harrison Ford, is an artificial human – an “android” or “replicant.” His job is to go out and kill other, rogue androids.
If he’s an android, he’s of the latest model, Nexus 7. That’s also the name Google has picked for the first tablet to bear the Google brand. Clearly, its mission is to go out and kill rogue tablets running Google’s Android software.
Specifically, the Nexus 7 seems to have been designed to give anyone who bought a Kindle Fire from Amazon.com or a Nook Tablet from Barnes & Noble a lethal case of buyer’s remorse.
The Nexus 7 costs $199, the same that Amazon and Barnes & Noble charge for their tablets. Google announced the tablet last week and is taking pre-orders for delivery in mid-July.
Why is Google targeting the Kindle Fire and the Nook Tablet? Because they’ve been relatively successful competitors to Apple’s iPad tablet, yet Google is getting no benefit from their success.
Google makes its Android operating software available for any device manufacturer to use.
Amazon and Barnes & Noble took Android and modified it heavily. Namely, they took out the applications that point to Google’s services and the advertising it sells. Instead, the apps point to the companies’ own stores.
In other words, these tablets are rogue Androids.
Other tablets, such as Samsung’s Galaxy, use the “proper,” Googlish version of Android, but they’ve been more expensive than the Kindle Fire and Nook Tablet. Apparently, Google thought it was time to make a really good, proper Android tablet for $199.
It’s succeeded. Nexus 7 is a really good value. It’s made by AsusTek Computer, a Taiwanese company that was originally planning to sell a similar tablet for $249.The Nexus 7 is a plain black slab with a screen that’s 7 inches on the diagonal – the same size as the Nook and the Fire. The most noticeable feature it has over the competition is a low-resolution camera, facing the user. That means the Nexus 7 can be used for videoconferencing, but it’s nearly impossible to use for snapshots. It also has a microphone, which the Fire lacks, making Amazon’s device useless even for audio
conferencing.The screen has a higher resolution than the Fire, and colors look more vivid. The whole tablet is slightly thinner and appreciably lighter than the Fire.
Other nifty but invisible hardware upgrades on the Nexus 7 include Bluetooth and GPS chips for use with headsets and navigation software. The tablet even has a chip for near-field communications, which means it can “talk” to some phones and store payment terminals when tapped against them.
But the most important difference between the Nexus 7 and its prey is the software. Not only is it running stock Android, but it’s also the first device to run the latest version of Android. Google, with its trademark combination of cute and cutthroat, calls it “Jelly Bean.”
Stock Android gives Nexus 7 access to a much wider array of applications than its competitors, running into the hundreds of thousands. The diversity also applies to content: You can use a wider range of e-book stores and movie services on the Nexus 7. You can read Kindle books on the Nexus 7, for example, but you can’t read Google books on the Kindle. Google does its best, though, to steer users to its “Play” store for apps, movies, music and books. Buyers even get a $25 credit toward store purchases, partly defraying the cost
of the tablet itself.
Original Post By THE TIMES OF INDIA.

Killer Features:-ANDROID4.0 VS iOS6

It’s hard to argue that Android is more usable than iOS overall. The truth is that iOS is a more limited, simplified experience, but that makes it easy for most users to pick up and start using right away and makes it hard for them to get themselves in trouble by misconfiguring things. By contrast, Android is more flexible and customizable, but it can also be more difficult to navigate and more apt to confuse smartphone novices.

However, the alerts system is the one area where Android is just flat out more useful and more usable than iPhone. If that sounds trivial, it’s not — especially for business professionals and others who do a lot of stuff with their smartphones. Alerts give you timely updates of important information, quickly let you know about things that need your attention, and give you an at-a-glance look at your latest messages from various sources.

Apple made big strides with its alerts system in iOS 5 — taking obvious inspiration from Android — but even the vastly-improved alerts system still didn’t match the power and efficiency of what Android offers. In fact, iOS 5 didn’t match Android 2.3 “Gingerbread,” which still powers the vast majority of Android phones. Meanwhile, Google enhanced the alerts functionality even more in Android 4.0 “Ice Cream Sandwich,” which debuted at the end of 2011.

The biggest advantage that Android alerts have over iOS alerts is immediate glance-ability, and a lot of that has to do with the fundamental design of the platform. That’s why iOS appears unlikely to catch up in this area any time soon. For more info please click here: http://goo.gl/tCSVk

Android Alerts preview

Image

iOS alerts preview

Image