Showing Results: Most Recent
Pros: Good display quality. It's a IPS screen backed by LED backlighting, so it's very bright and energy efficient. I am using this replacing a LCD 24 inch 1980x1200 display as a secondary display on a workstation system. This display is far lighter and generates a whole lot less heat than the LCD display it replaced. The color is also natural and accurate, I turned the display from maximum brightness to about 75% for my home office lighting conditions, the display is quite bright. Not as bright as my main 27 inch LED display on the workstation, but I had to turn down brightness on both displays for my home office which has a window sitting next to my computer desk, so the brightness would not be a problem for any indoor use scenarios.
Due to its 21:9 display proportion, this display is superb for displaying two documents side by side. If you have to consolidate two spreadsheets or debug two sections of codes side by side, this display is brilliant, as it is practically two 5:4 shape displays merged into one. With win7 and above's "snap-in-place" display feature, you can easily compare two documents side by side which would increase certain productivity tasks tremendously.
The display also support a hardware based Picture By Picture mode which allows you to display two inputs in a 5:4 proportion on the display as the same time.
The display also has a lot of input choices for a computer display, sporting 1 DL-DVI, 2 HMDI, and 1 display port + 2 audio inputs (in addition to the HMDI).
The hardware scaling capability is quite nice on the display, showing original content in 1980x1080 resolution, the scaling is acceptably smooth and jaggedness free, especially in motion videos.
But it's best capability is scaling the ultra-wide feature movies and reduce the "letter-box" black bars above and below the movie contents. Due to its very tight pixel pitch, the scaled movie contents from DVD or Bluray in ultra-wide mode is quite pleasing and significantly reduces the "blank" space above the below the movie content for those types of source materials. Even when using relative low-res sources (such as the HDMI output from a regular DVD player), the output on the screen even when scaled to the Ultra-wide's 21:9 proportion is quite pleasing and smooth.
The display also comes with display resolution adjustment software for windows and Mac that will allow you to quick adjust on screen contents for best "side-by-side" display on full screen which is probably more useful on windows OS prior to WIn7 where automatic snap in is not readily available, or when the ultra-wide is used as a secondary display and Windows native "snap-to" feature does not work as well as on a single screen system.
The ultra-wide proportion definitely reduced any kind of width wise scrolling for any application.
The on screen menu is comparably easy and clear, despite of a large number of options available on the display.
The display also features very thin bezels.
Cons: There's a "shimmering" effect that washes out the image on the screen if you get close and get to about 45 degrees just above or below the perpendicular line from the screen. This is a bit surprising as if you go further above or below the perpendicular line, the effect gives away and image becomes clear again. From normal viewing angles, the display is great, but for an IPS display its viewing angle is not as wide as some other I have seen (such as the IPS thinkpad display I had on my old T60), but it is however far brighter than earlier generation IPS displays.
The vertical size of this ultra wide similar to a 19-20 inch 16:9 display, so it is definitely probably less suited for tasks like photoshop or a single spreadsheet than movies.
Gaming support is lacking, as most game would only support 16:9 proportion in its' most wide configurations.
Overall, after some use, I find it is taking some time for me to get used to the ultra-wide form factor of this display. Maybe it is just me, as it took me quite a while to fully adapt to the 16:9 display proportion from the 4:3 of the old days. Often, I feel a maximized screen on the ultra-wide 21:9 screen's native resolution is too wide for most average use (such as word processing or photo re-touching) . The ultra wide screen also makes webpage's vertical screen seems tedious, if only due to mental illusion due to the perception against the much larger width.
Other Thoughts: Note the DVI input will require Dual Link cable for full native resolution display as the screen's native resolution at 2560x1080 exceeds a single DVI link's 1980x1200 limitation. This applies to the DVI input only. The display also only comes with a single HDMI cable, with a display card capable of dual-link output on the HDMI interface, full native resolution is supportable on a regular HDMI 1.3 cable or above.
Over-all in my opinion, this is a good display for displaying ultra-wide movie contents and for side by side document comparison work. Scaling normal single window application to full screen leave the screen width exceedingly large (as least takes times to get used to), and the applications are run in more "squared" windows shape, there would be a lot of blank space on the side of window width wise.
Also, despite the 25 inch diagonal measurement, the vertical space on this display is closer to a 19 inch 16:9 display. I would recommend for large desk to use a 21:9 proportion display, a 29 inch display would be a more comfortable desktop working size than a 25 inch unit. If your desk is smaller, then this is a display of good quality and very fine pixel pitch all wrapped in a thin bezel pleasing design.
Pros: Very responsive screen, the stylus included also makes this touch screen very precise, the hand detection feature allows one to put hands on the screen without it interfering with stylus operation, makes note taking a much more realistic endeavor. Also the inclusion of the stylus makes sketching on the tablet a definitive possibility, this is the most useful feature in my opinion, it makes apps like evernote so much more useful and valuable.
The table also automatically detects when the stylus is removed from the holding slot and brings up relevant features for the stylus and allow OS enhancement specifically tuned for stylus use, which is a very useful feature.
The NVIDIA Tegra 4 chip is very responsive, has plenty of horse power to compete against the latest generation of the most popular Qualcomm chips but also allow finer steps power saving tweaking. This tablet has a utility to allow you to limit the cores to 1, 2, 3, or 4 to reduce battery consumption vs. processing power, further, it has a utility that allow you to fine tune wake up timing for each app installed on the tablet to allow longer battery life.
It also support external SD card, and since this is currently running android 4.2.2, there isn't the goof restriction on the write permission that showed up in Android 4.4.x, so you have full control over the inserted SD card which is a pro in my opinion against any current tablet supporting SD card running the latest Android. Functionally, there's little difference between android 4.2 and 4.4 to matter to any user. The screen has sRGB or native calibration, which allow user to make a choice in better color matching for most digital photos.
The battery life is also comparable to the Nexus 7 with all cores enabled.
From an appearance perspective, it is as good as the Nexus 7 but the casing of this tablet is more in the traditional line, it's hard to describe, but I have a preference towards the more traditional styling, so I actually prefer this tablet styling over the Nexus 7 which is more "modern" if there's a way to state it.
The sound on the slate 7 is also more powerful than the Nexus 7, is has dual front projection speakers while Nexus 7 has speakers on the back.
Cons: The screen resolution is 1280x800, it's not full 1080p. But in reality, a 7 inch screen read from a reasonable distance, the screen resolution makes virtually no difference. This is the most obvious short coming from the first glance. If you get really close and stare at the screen, the Nexus 7 has smoother fonts and better clarify due to higher resolution. However, for actual use, the lower resolution screen will give better battery life, and the reduction in resolution really is more of a tech spec ego issue than actual shortcoming.
The wifi 802.11N chip on this tablet only support the traditional 2.4GHz band, it does not operate on 5Ghz bands like the Nexus 7, which means if the 2.4GHz band is crowded in your home you'd get a bit less wifi throughput from this tablet. It does support N standard, just no 5GHz band. I had no issue with the wifi speed other than it could not find my 5GHz AP on my home router.
Due to it's less popularity, you will find there're much less variety of accessories available for this unit compared to Nexus 7, such as cases and screen protectors, but there are options that works good just not as many varieties.
The Unit only has 1GB of RAM (compared to 2 in Nexus), although in real operation this has not been any problem for any of the apps. The internal memory is 16GB, a 32GB internal storage option would be nice.
Other Thoughts: When I got the slate 7 extreme, I was a bit skeptical when comparing it to my Nexus 7. On the paper, the Nexus 7 is clearly superior, it has more RAM, larger internal memory option, latest Android version, a "faster" processor, and a 1080p native screen. However, my opinion of the HP slate 7 Extreme changed the moment I received the unit. Upon opening it, I immediately took a liking of the appearance and size of the unit. It is slightly longer and wider than the Nexus 7, make it a better more substantial hold in hand. The screen is of good quality, makes the screen resolution a non-issue in real operation. The inclusion of SD card is a HUGE bonus.
However, the most significant difference is the behavior of the touch screen. The Nexus 7 has been plagued in my experience with random touch screen irregularities, even after a replacement unit. This has also been widely observed on the net from a wide variety of sources. The Nexus 7 touch screen would sometime misbehave, making a lot of multi-touch operations such as properly pinch to zoom, or page flipping pages in E-reader or game control anything but nearly impossible. And it seems to stem from an inherent hardware design problem. The HP slate 7 on the other hand has a SOLID touch screen control, it has never misbehaved in any of its multi-touch functions, on that point alone, the HP slate 7 is a better unit than the Nexus 7. On top of that, I thought the stylus would be a trivial addition to the unit, but once I tried it out on the unit, I immediately believe it adds a tremendous amount of true functionally to the unit. Note taking and sketching on the tablet becomes a practical reality vs. gimmicky trick, and the precision control of on-screen element is also tremendously increased using a stylus vs. a finger.
In reality, I mostly compared this unit to the Nexus 7 unit which I owned prior to having the HP slate 7 extreme, I will in fact be selling my Nexus 7 soon. On paper the Nexus 7 is a better unit, but in reality, with much superior touch screen control and the addition of the stylus, the HP slate 7 is definitely a better "users" choice than the Nexus 7. I am glad I find a tablet I am fully happy with after many months of tolerating Nexus 7.
This review is from: Seagate Central STCG4000100 4TB Cloud Storage System
Pros: Good transfer speed, easy hardware setup. As I mentioned before this drive can sustain up to 50MBps transfer rate if connected to a good quality gigabit Ethernet switch. And the hardware setup is very simple, a power cord connection and a network cord to the switch is all that's needed. If you can remember to access private folders before you access public folder so the access credentials are properly established on a windows system shared and private folder access are both possible on this NAS. Also much to the contraray to what may be indicated on the box and other comments, this NAS is equally accessible on a linux system if the Samba client system is properly configured and installed on the Linux system. I was able to successfully access all private and public folder from my Ubuntu setup quite easily with good file transfer speed over a Gigabit Ethernet interface.
Cons: Clumsy device software. Also the NAS's share does not allow explicit access control for assigned user, you can only have universal access to a single public folder or a single user full access to a dedicated folder. There is no group share, or share between selected users. Also if you access the public folder first, your default user login credential will be used for subsequent login access due to the default windows login behavior. One has to remember to access a private folder first if the user name on the NAS is not identical to the login name on the system accessing the NAS. This subtle issue could present a lot of access headache on windows system if a particular user access the public folder first with anonymous access and then try to access a private folder on this NAS. Other NAS system I have used allow one to explicitly specify user group, user access rights to prevent such issues, the Seagate NAS is not nearly as customize-able in that sense. Also remote access is having trouble with the stateful NAT and firewall setup on my home network and could not establish external link for universal mobile access from the internet (which is probably a good thing as the network protection in place is doing its job). The details on setting up this access and what port the access software is attempting to use is very sketchy, making it hard to allow successful access if you still want tight control over the security of your home network.
Other Thoughts: As mentioned in my early review, the universal media access function is ill implemented and guidance is very slim, it does not reveal its access method and is often blocked by common NAT and firewall provisions. Additionally, the software message on the failed setup of remote access password indicates it failed due to an "Unknown" reason, which offers very little insight as to why the software is not working. Poor software quality is the general impression. However, as a general purpose home NAS that does not need sophisticated share setup for network folders, this Seagate Central NAS system is acceptable and offers ample storage room. However, some of the external media access feature needs a lot more software polish and a better thought-out access method before I would consider it reliable and secure for the functionality it is attempting to provide to the end user. I generally avoid tunneled access through my home network NAT and firewall to avoid undesirable external access from the Internet, and not providing details on how the universal media access works and what ports it works with and not allow customized port configuration and folder share control as well as workgroup definition for the shares makes this system less ideal for power users.READ FULL REVIEW