Apple iPad Mini vs Google Nexus 7 vs Samsung Galaxy Note 8.0 comparison review

Two of the biggest tablets on the market are the Google Nexus 7 and the Apple iPad mini, but Samsung has introduced the Galaxy Note 8.0. We compare these three contrasting tablets in our Apple iPad Mini vs Google Nexus 7 tablet comparison review.
There's plenty to talk about with these three very different tablets so we've split this article up into various sections so you can concentrate on the areas which are important to you.
The Galaxy Note 8.0 is the most recent of the tablets here and we're expecting new versions of the Nexus 7 and iPad mini this year, so bear this in mind.

Apple iPad Mini vs Google Nexus 7 vs Samsung Galaxy Note 8.0: Price

Price will no doubt play a big part in deciding between these tablets. The Nexus 7 remains the cheapest of the three at just £159 - it's quite simply a bargain. The iPad mini is next starting at £269 for the equivalent model and has more models on offer plus different colours. 
Samsung has recently put the Samsung Galaxy Note 8.0 on sale in the UK. At the time of writing it's just the 16GB Wi-Fi model which is available for a more pricey £339. We'll update you on the other models as and when we get information.
It's worth noting that the Galaxy Note 8.0 is the only one of the three which allows phone calls and text messages with the model with a SIM-card slot - making it a phablet. The iPad mini and Nexus 7 only allow data.
Check out the tablet PC below for full pricing details:

Model	Apple iPad mini	Google Nexus 7	Samsung Galaxy Note 8.0
16GB Wi-Fi only	£269	£159	£339
32GB Wi-Fi only	£349	£199	TBC
64GB Wi-Fi only	£429	n/a	n/a
16GB Wi-Fi + cellular	£369	n/a	TBC
32GB Wi-Fi + cellular	£449	£239	TBC
64GB Wi-Fi + cellular	£529	n/a	n/a

Apple iPad Mini vs Google Nexus 7 vs Samsung Galaxy Note 8.0: Dimensions

As well as being the cheapest, the Nexus 7 is also the smallest tablet on offer here at 120 x 199mm.
 However, it is the thickest at 10.5mm. Apple's iPad mini is a little bigger at 135 x 200mm and thinner at 7.2mm. The Samsung Galaxy Note 8.0 is the biggest of the three at 136 x 211mm and 8mm thick.
In terms of weight, the iPad mini wins at 308g while the Nexus 7 and Galaxy Note 8.0 are tied at 340g for Wi-Fi only models.

Apple iPad Mini vs Google Nexus 7 vs Samsung Galaxy Note 8.0: Screen

You can pretty much guess from the dimensions, and the product names, that the Nexus 7 has the smallest screen at 7in. The iPad mini and Galaxy Note 8.0 have effectively the same screen size at 7.9in and 8in respectively.
The Nexus 7 and Galaxy Note 8.0 both use a 1280 x 800 resolution and factoring in the screen size, the former has a higher pixel density at 216ppi compared to 189ppi. The Apple iPad mini has the lowest resolution and pixel density at 1024 x 768 and 163ppi.
Both the Nexus 7 and iPad mini offer an IPS display while the Galaxy Note 8.0 uses a TFT panel. Samsung's tablet is the only one of the tablets which comes with a stylus, in this case an S Pen.

Apple iPad Mini vs Google Nexus 7 vs Samsung Galaxy Note 8.0: Processor

Google's Nexus 7 is equipped with a 1.2GHz nVidia Tegra 3 quad-core chip along 1GB of RAM. The iPad Mini is equipped with Apple's A5 1GHz dual-core processor which was used in the iPhone 4S and iPad 2. It has 512MB of RAM.
The Samsung Galaxy Note 8.0 has the most impressive core specifications with a 1.6GHz Exynos 4412 quad-core processor and 2GB of RAM. We haven't benchmarked the Galaxy Note 8.0 yet but we expect it to outpace the Nexus 7 and iPad mini.
See the table below for our benchmark results:

Benchmark	Apple iPad mini	Google Nexus 7
GeekBench 2	752	1452
SunSpider (JavaScript)	1442ms	1682ms
GLBenchmark	24fps	14fps

Apple iPad Mini vs Google Nexus 7 vs Samsung Galaxy Note 8.0: Storage

As usual, Apple offers the most amount of storage options with 16GB, 32GB and 64GB on offer. The Google Nexus 7 and Samsung Galaxy Note 8.0 both have either 16GB or 32GB.
Samsung has a trump card up its sleeve here by adding in a microSD card slot which can take up to a further 64GB.

Apple iPad Mini vs Google Nexus 7 vs Samsung Galaxy Note 8.0: Cameras

We're not too bothered about cameras on tablets but if they're important to you here's the deal. The Nexus 7 is the most limited with just at 1.2Mp front facing camera, ok if you just want to make video calls.
The iPad mini and Galaxy Note 8.0 have similar camera specs. Each has a 5Mp rear facing camera and a 1.2Mp and 1.3Mp front facing camera respectively.

Apple iPad Mini vs Google Nexus 7 vs Samsung Galaxy Note 8.0: Connectivity

As we mentioned earlier, the main difference in the connectivity stakes is that the Galaxy Note 8.0 can send and receive phone calls and text messages if you buy the model with a SIM slot. The Nexus 7 and iPad mini only offer a data connection.
All the tablets come with Wi-Fi, Bluetooth and GPS connectivity. However, only the Nexus 7 comes with NFC. Apple's iPad mini uses a proprietary Lightning connector while the others use a common microUSB port.

Apple iPad Mini vs Google Nexus 7 vs Samsung Galaxy Note 8.0: Software

Apple's iPad Mini will runs on its own iOS 6 operating system with Siri included. Meanwhile the Nexus 7 and Galaxy Note 8.0 both run Google's Android 4.1 Jelly Bean. The Nexus 7 has stock Android but Samsung adds its own TouchWiz interface. Read out reviews of each operating system to find out more.

Apple iPad Mini vs Google Nexus 7 vs Samsung Galaxy Note 8.0: Battery

The Nexus 7 has a 16Wh battery promising 10 hours of battery life when browsing the web over Wi-Fi. The iPad Mini also offers 10 hours of battery life surfing the web over Wi-Fi thanks to its 16.3Wh battery. Samsung makes the biggest claim of 14 hours since the Galaxy Note 8.0 has a 17Wh battery built-in.
From:http://www.pcadvisor.co.uk/reviews/tablets/3440914/apple-ipad-mini-vs-google-nexus-7-vs-samsung-galaxy-note-80-review/


745TDBanty 130628

Amazon Kindle Fire HD vs Kindle Fire HD 8.9 tablet comparison review

Kindle Fire HD vs Kindle Fire HD 8.9: what is Kindle Fire HD?

Both the original Amazon Kindle Fire HD and the Kindle Fire HD 8.9 are grown up e-readers that are also great for watching movies and films, browsing the web, sending and receiving email and playing games. You can download and install apps and music, and - yes - read books.
Indeed, with its heavily customised version of Android the Kindle Fire HD is a well-priced full-blown tablet, albeit an Android tablet that is tied in to Amazon's world. You can buy books, music, games, apps and movies to your heart's content - but you have to buy them from Amazon. That's not a problem. Amazon is, after all, pretty well stocked on that score. But it does illustrate the limitations of the Kindle Fire model. If Amazon doesn't want you to install it, you can't install it.
There are benefits to this: both the original Kindle Fire HD and the Kindle Fire HD 8.9 share an easy-to-use interface. They are entertainment devices designed to be used by just about anybody - regardless of their technical knowledge.
As you might expect finding and reading books using the Kindle Fire HD and Kindle Fire HD 8.9 is a great experience, even allowing for the extra weight. But you will find some limitations. You can install third-party apps, for instance, but it requires some technical knowledge to run apps from outside of Amazon's own app store. So although you can watch BBC TV programs on BBC iPlayer, ITV Player and 4oD remain conspicuous by their absence.
Movies is another area in which the Kindle Fire HD and Kindle Fire HD 8.9 are slightly hobbled. Amazon wants you to use Lovefilm Instant for movies. To access this you need to sign up for a monthly subscription. That's all well and good, but it is an extra expense and to use Lovefilm you have to be online (you can't download films to your device). You can also install the Netflix app and sign up for that service.
And even the web-browsing experience is far from perfect. There's no general support for Flash, which means some websites don't work perfectly. Amazon has now included a Flash video player, however, so you can watch video clips embedded on websites. 

Kindle Fire HD vs Kindle Fire HD 8.9: design and build

The Kindle Fire HD 8.9 shares almost identical design and build quality with the original Kindle Fire HD - it is simply stretched to incorporate a bigger screen. So where the original Kindle Fire HD (and the originial Kindle Fire, for that matter) sports a 7in display, the newer Kindle Fire HD has an 8.9in screen. In both cases the screen is designed to be used in landscape format for everything but reading books. You get a shiny black slab with a capacitative touchscreen taking up most of the front.
Build quality is similar: Kindle Fire HD tablets are designed to be used often and on the move, and to sell at a cheap price. So they are robust and built to last but lack a little of the stylish finish of iPads or Nexus tablets. The bezel around the screen on both devices is thicker than we'd like, and at 567g the Kindle Fire HD 8.9 is a little heavy for a tablet. (Add in Amazon's well-designed case attached and you'll find yourself carrying around 785g.) If weight is an issue you could opt for the lighter Kindle Fire HD. Its 395g feels significantly lighter, especially when in use as an e-reader - try holding 567g in one hand as you read in bed. (For comparison the smallest Kindle e-reader weighs just 170g, but the Nexus 7 7in tablet is 340g. In my experience that is perfectly fine for reading e-books.)
This virtually identical design means both the Kindle Fire HD and Kindle Fire HD 8.9 sport similar ports, features and buttons in similar places. With either devive look on the bottom edge for micro-USB and micro-HDMI ports, and find the headphone jack sitting near the top. In both cases the two speakers are seated to the left and the right on the rear of the tablet, and the webcam is situated centrally above the screen. It does seem odd for an entertainment device to have rear-facing speakers, but the Kindle Fire HD and Kindle Fire HD 8.9 are hardly alone in that respect. And Amazon gets back its kudos for including the necessary cables and adaptors for synch/charge and TV output.
Both the Kindle Fire HD and Kindle Fire HD 8.9 hide their volume and power buttons on the right-hand side, flush with the tablet body. This can make them hard to find by touch alone. They also both suffer from a niggle with the keyboard in which the back button in the status bar sometimes sits to the right of the keyboard and you instinctively tap it to delete, instead of using the Delete key on the keyboard itself.

Kindle Fire HD vs Kindle Fire HD 8.9: display

The first Kindle Fire HD has a 7in, 1280x800 10-point multitouch capacitive screen which uses an IPS LCD panel. That makes HD movies look good, with decent detail at a pixel-density level of 215ppi. One of the advantages of the Kindle Fire HD 8.9 is its excellent full HD screen. It has a resolution of 1920x1080 which means that it has a pixel density of 254ppi over a bigger area. In the case of both devices viewing angles are wide, colours are deep and contrast is good. But the 8.9in device makes up for its heavier weight with a bigger, more detailed screen.

Kindle Fire HD vs Kindle Fire HD 8.9: hardware and performance

Being blunt, the original Kindle Fire HD wasn't as fast as we'd have liked. In use it doesn't feel as snappy as an iPad mini or Nexus 7, especially when browsing the web or launching apps. Scrolling around web pages shows a white screen until the content is loaded.
In Geekbench 2, the Fire HD managed 1124 which is slower than the Nexus 7, which scored 1452. Running the SunSpider Javascript test returned a score of 1783ms, which is again slower than the Nexus 7 with 1665ms.
Scroll forward to the Kindle Fire HD 8.9 and things have improved... a little. The Kindle Fire HD 8.9 scored an average of 1398 in Geekbench 2, and managed a usable 12fps in the Egypt HD test from GLBenchmark. In the Sunspider JavaScript test, it averaged 1376ms.
The Kindle Fire HD 8.9 has a faster dual-core processor than the Kindle Fire  HD but this doesn't make it feel noticeably zippier in general use. Both Kindle Fire HD devices trail the Nexus 7 in this respect, although the Kindle Fire HD 8.9 pretty much matches that tablet PC  in our benchmarks.
From:http://www.pcadvisor.co.uk/reviews/tablets/3440886/kindle-fire-hd-vs-kindle-fire-hd-89-review/
745TDBanty 130627
F
Fr

HP ElitePad 900 review - stylish Windows tablet open for business

The HP ElitePad is a tablet PC running 32-bit Windows 8 Pro, aimed at business users. Running Windows 8 means that it has an Intel rather than an Arm processor - in this case an Intel Atom Z2760 chip clocked at 1.5GHz-1.8GHz combined with 2GB RAM. Often tablets that run full-blown Windows sacrifce performance and battery life in order to offer full PC capabilities. We took the HP ElitePad 900 Windows tablet for a spin to see how it stacks up in a world of thin-and-light, high performance tablets.

HP ElitePad 900: build, style

Show the HP ElitePad to a non-technical friend and they'll likely describe it as 'an iPad'. A square slate, all black Gorilla Glass on the front and silver aluminum on the back, the moderately stylish ElitePad does differ from the competition, but mostly in ways of which we're not personally enamoured. The bezel is wide and the corners rounded in an almost cartoonish way. And the tablet's edges taper to a point that is almost sharp to the touch - it's a strange style point, because at 9.2mm this qualifies as a thin full-sized tablet (thinner than the iPad with Retina Display). It's also not as heavy as you might expect from an Intel tablet - at 680g it is in the same ball park as the 650g iPad, and blows out of the water the Surface Pro (Microsoft's own Windows 8 slate weighs 900g and is 13.5mm thick).
There is, alas, a single proprietary connector at the bottom. This allows the ElitePad to connect with a number of accessories - but only HP's own accessories. And we found the connector had a tendancy to slip out in our tests. At the top of the ElitePad is a power button, screen rotation lock and headphone jack. A volume rocker sits on the left. You can find welcome MicroSD and micro-SIM slots on the righthand side.
Generally the ElitePad feels unremarkable but classy. You certainly wouldn't feel ashamed to plonk it down on a meeting room table, and it feels built to last, but the silver back of the ElitePad did pick up black marks in our few days of carrying it around.

HP ElitePad 900: display

The ElitePad has a 10.1in multitouch Gorilla Glass display powered by PowerVR SGX 545 graphics. It's an LED display with a native resolution of 1280x800 - or WXGA, if you like. That gives it a pixels per inch of 150 - not poor in comparison to your Windows laptop, but very far from the eye-catching displays of consumer tablets such as the iPad with Retina Display (264ppi) and the Nexus 10 (300ppi). An image aspect ratio of 16:10 makes it a widescreen display in its native landscape format, which will be good for business tasks such as email and spreadsheets. And that is probably why the display is relatively underpowered on the detail front - this is a business tool and the ElitePad doesn't need to be able to display HD movies or games with any great degree of clarity.
In use the ElitePad's display is perfectly adequate. Text on the live tiles in Windows 8's Modern UI is occasionally a little unclear, but on documents with white backgrounds everything is fine. Viewing angles are pretty good, too. Subjectively the touchscreen can feel a little spongy in comparison to the best Arm-powered tablets, but not to the extent we could complain about it. Photos look pretty good - occasionally a little washed out and lacking a tiny bit of detail.

HP ElitePad 900: performance, specifications, battery life

Here's where we get to the meat of the issue: how does the ElitePad perform? First our subjective thoughts: the ElitePad is not a noticeably bad performer. It is perfectly adequate for general web-browsing and office use. But the sacrifices made to fit a Windows PC into such a svelte frame are there to be seen. As I previously mentioned the ElitePad is a much smaller device that the Surface Pro, but it can't hold a candle to Microsoft's tablet when it comes to performance. And that is born out by the test results.
Where the Surface Pro turned in an Ultrabook-like PCMark7 benchmark score of 4751, the ElitePad could stretch to an average score of only 1444. That's not a disaster, it puts it on a par with other Windows 8 tablets such as the Acer Iconia W510 and HP's own Envy x2 hybrid laptop/tablet device. The latter turned in a score of 1402 - like the ElitePad the Envy X2 is adequate for basic tasks such as web browsing, streaming video and running Microsoft Office. Don't even think about trying the latest Windows games, however.
'But that's not fair', I hear you shout. 'The ElitePad is a tablet and as such it should be compared to other tablets.' Never let it be said that I don't listen to you, imaginary head voices. In our GeekBench2 tablet and smartphone benchmark the ElitePad returned an average score of 1430. Given the ElitePad's business credentials this equates pretty well with the iPad's score of 1769. The Nexus 10's 2505 blows it away, but it is worth pointing out that those are the fastest two 10in tablets we have tested.
And although we can't prove it with our own science, we were impressed with the ElitePad's battery life. With moderate use throughout the day we found we could get a day out of the ElitePad which is the basic for tablets (and unusual for Intel Atom based devices). Indeed, CNET Asia recorded 8 hours and 24 minutes of use on test, which is very strong for an Intel Atom device. The battery is a 2-cell (25 WHr) polymer HP Long Life cell.
You get 64GB or 32GB of storage, as well as that MicroSD card slot. Our 64GB device has only 40GB of availabile space, however. Other now standard android tablet features are present: NFC, accelerometer, gyroscope, e-compass and ambient light sensor. Our model has a 3G chip, but that is an optional extra.

HP EitePad 900: camera(s?)

The ElitePad has an 8Mp rear-facing camera, and a front-facing 2Mp webcam. That webcam is no slouch in the video department, able to capture 1080p HD video. Your camera's shot button is a tap of the screen. Software options include brightness, contrast, flicker and exposure, and you can set the megapixel rating of shots captured. We doubt anyone would buy the ElitePad in order to use it as their primary snapper, and that's reflected in its capabilities. Video calling using the front facing camera is pretty good. As is video captured by it (there's a test video below).
I'd love to tell you how good, bad or indifferent is the rear-facing 8Mp camera, but I couldn't work out how to use it. It is in the specs list, and there is a definite lens-like hole on the back... but we simply can't work out how to enable it. And if that is embarrassing for me as a technology journalist with more than 10 years under my belt, it doesn't reflect all that well on the ElitePad's usability.
745TDBanty 130626
From:http://www.pcadvisor.co.uk/reviews/tablets/3438716/hp-elitepad-900-review/

GoTab's budget rival to the Apple iPad mini and Google Nexus 7 is the GTi8

GoTab's budget rival to the Apple iPad mini and Google Nexus 7 is the GTi8. We spent time with the android tablet at The Gadget Show Live so here's our GoTab GTi8 hands-on review.
You’d be forgiven for mistaking the GoTab GTi8 with a white model of the iPad mini, but this tablet is significantly cheaper at just £119. The two are a similar size and share a similar design. The front of the tablet is predominantly which is surrounded by a fairly thick bezel. The only thing missing is the iconic Apple physical home button.
Flip the GTi8 over and you see a silver cover which looks remarkably like the iPad mini's. It too is made from aluminium which is surprising given the price. Build quality of the GoTab GTi8 is one of the best we've seen for a cheap tablet.
The name suggests the tablet is tuned for performance like cars with the badge but the internal specs are distinctly mid-ranged. You get a 1.6GHz dual-core processor and 1GB of RAM – not bad for a tablet this cheap. We found the GoTab GTi8 extremely nippy for a budget tablet, struggling not with the homescreens, app menus, recent apps and playing games like angry birds.
Storage matches the original Nexus 7 models at 8GB and 16GB. This isn't great considering the Nexus 7 comes with 16GB for £159 but the GoTab offers a microSD card which the Nexus doesn't
The screen is an inch larger than Google's tablet at 8in, effectively matching the iPad mini. GoTab's GTi8 offer the same 1024 x768 resolution as the iPad mini which is impressive.

However, the panel in question is considerably lower quality. The biggest problem we found with the tablet PC was its narrow viewing angles; you really do have to look straight on to see what's being displayed properly.
The GTi8 comes with the usual connectivity such as Wi-Fi and Bluetooth but also has an HDMI port which is a particular rarity. At the low price, we were surprised to find front and rear cameras although they are only rated at VGA and 2Mp respectively.

Like a lot of budget tablets we’ve seen, the GTi8 runs a vanilla version of Android 4.1 Jelly Bean and that's a good thing. It's like a blank canvas waiting for your customisation. There's the usual access to the Google Play Store for apps, games, books, movies and music.
From:http://www.pcadvisor.co.uk/reviews/tablets/3438258/gotab-gti8-review/

745TDBanty 130625

 

From: