Living with the Nexus 7

When the thirty two gigabyte version of Googles Nexus 7 hit retail outlets in November it soon found its way into many Christmas stockings. Good or bad the Nexus is here to stay but is it as good, or bad, as some would have you believe?

Well, having bought a Nexus 7, it's time to dispel some of the myths...and confirm others.

For those who have no idea what a Nexus 7 is, it's a seven inch tablet built for Google by Asus with a 720p high resolution display, up to thirty two gigabytes of storage space and running the latest version of the Android operating system.

So....let's start with the bad points. No hdmi output, no sd card slot for extra storage, no ability (unless rooted) to mount usb sticks and of course a slightly ugly default launcher.

Lack of video output is annoying, but if you have a dlna compatible tv you're in luck. You can use an app from the play store to stream video music or pictures from your tablet (or any other Android device) to your television.

After trying all those I could find I personally settled for an app called ArkMC. There are other applications available but testing revealed most to have problems when streaming to my particular brand of TV such as the irritating "unsupported media" error.

Another problem with the Nexus is its lack of expandable storage. The built in thirty two gigabytes of the newer version should be enough for most people but more would of course be better. While you can root your tablet and use a third party app called stickmount to read usb flash drives this invalidates your warranty, but fear not for there is in fact a way to do this without rooting.

If you have a USB flash drive and want to use it with your new Nexus simply buy a USB OTG (On The Go) cable and download an app from the play store called Nexus Media Importer. It costs a couple of pounds but for that low price you have an app that lets you read flash drives and memory cards without rooting so for those who prefer to leave their tablet unrooted this is a good alternative.

Now, that launcher.

While it is a matter of taste the default launcher doesn't impress with its looks but again, this being Android, you can easily replace the launcher with one of your own. I use Nemus Launcher because it uses little memory but does everything I want it to, but you can install any launcher you like and of course being Android it won't invalidate your warranty in any way, because you won't have to hack your tablet to do so.

So we've seen that there are quick and easy fixes to the key negatives about the Nexus 7 but there is of course one negative that can't be fixed no matter how hard you try, the lack of a rear camera.

Now to be fair that really is a matter of personal preference, while it would be nice to have a rear camera the truth is that it would increase the production costs for Asus and mean Google would have to sell the 7 at a higher price point.

Not that many people use their tablets to take photographs, yes there are some who do but being able to buy a decent tablet for under two hundred pounds that has great hardware and good manufacturer support in regard to updates (the Nexus is already running version 4.2 of the Android operating system) is worth the minor annoyance of not having a rear camera.

The good features of the Nexus are its Tegra 3 processor, which handles even the most demanding of applications, the inclusion of NFC, bluetooth and decent GPS hardware, a decent high resolution screen that is easy on the eyes and of course the magnetic lock.

Magnetic lock? Yes, you can buy cases for the Nexus 7 which will turn the screen on when opened and off when closed thanks to a small magnetic lock built into the tablet.

Design wise The Nexus looks good, the tablet is thin and easy to hold in one or two hands, some argue it may not be very durable although tests against the Apple iPad suggest that when it comes to durability the 7 may in fact be the better option.

The problem with the Nexus 7, and Android tablets in general, is the mistaken belief (thanks primarily to years of misinformation from key rival Apple) that, unlike the iPad range of tablets, Android models have to put up with scaled up phone apps which will look stretched and blurry because, again unlike the iPads, Android apps aren't designed for tablets whereas Apple developers release specific versions for Apples tablets.

Well the truth is that Android applications can be coded so they adapt to whatever size of screen you are using so, yes, an app you have on your phone can also be the exact same app you have on your tablet - but it won't look the same because the graphics can be different, the look can be changed to suit the higher resolution of the tablet and add new features or extra detail.

There are of course still apps designed only for Android tablets, but why?

Well aside from the obvious benefit of producing extra revenue for developers tablet specific apps can dispense with the support and code for things lower resolution devices with slower hardware will need and instead focus on much more detailed and processor intensive features and graphics without having to worry about trying to support the multitude of non tablet Androids that proliferate in retail stores around the world.

So yes many apps on Android tablets are indeed essentially scaled up phone apps, because the operating system is designed in such a way that one application can easily support multiple screen resolutions. Apple very cleverly turned what in reality is a positive feature of Android and successfully spun it as a negative, so should you be considering buying an Android device it's something worth being aware of.

Battery life is good at around eight hours of use per charge, graphics are as you would expect excellent as shown by any high end Android game although my favourite is currently a less obvious but still graphically intensive one, Zen Pinball HD which should you turn all possible effects in the game on will still run flawlessly while providing a visual treat to the eyes.

The rear speakers are decent, loud enough for most purposes and clarity is very good as you would fish expect.

Wait a minute, fish expect?

You weren't expecting that fish, I just slipped it in there out of the blue and essentially Google have done exactly the same with the Nexus 7, slipping a high end well designed tablet into the market at a budget sized price.

Mine is used for gaming, sometimes, but primarily web browsing, watching films, creating ebooks and checking email so while these don't really tax the processor it is nice to have the hardware that, when I want to play a high end game or stream a high def movie while doing something else at the same time, can easily handle it.

The original Nexus 7 first came out six months ago and continues to hold its own as a decent capable and user friendly tablet, a seven inch tablet is great for everyday use and the smaller size makes it much more portable than larger rivals but ultimately it depends on what you really need a tablet for and what your budget is.

For those on a budget the 7 is undoubtedly one of the best tablets, and suitably portable, beating even some much higher priced challengers such as the iPad mini. But then for those already used to Apple products the mini may warrant the extra outlay despite having slightly lower specifications.

In everyday use the 7 is a more than competent tablet, its decent battery life means it can be left on all day (or night) and used at any time which, with its portability, makes it a handy device to have around. The screen is sharp and easy on the eyes and the choice of applications on offer from the play store certainly varied enough to keep you from being bored.

Overall the Nexus 7 then is an easy to use tablet which, while not likely to quite challenge the larger and more expensive fourth generation iPad, is an impressive and, more importantly, wallet friendly device.

Skyfall and the future of James Bond

It's already being hailed as one of the best James Bond films and, having already broken a few box office records, is certainly a commercial success but can it really live up to the hype, and just what does the future have in store for the worlds favourite agent?

In his previous outings as James Bond, Daniel Craig was criticised as a poor choice. Some of that criticism was based more on the fact that the new Bond movies were a departure from the traditional Bond format, something which disappointed many fans, but many saw Craig as a poor choice for the role and were far from shy in telling the world just how poor a choice he was.

His next outing saw a little more acceptance as the new Bond slowly began to evolve into a grittier but still not "traditional" 007 and left fans divided as to whether the franchise could continue to be as popular as it had been in its heyday. Craig, it seemed, was Bond marmite, you either loved him or hated him.

Skyfall has, surprisingly, split opinion still further with many lauding it as a welcome return to form while others have decried it as mindless slow paced drivel punctuated by a few loud set piece action sequences but can it really be that bad....or good?

Director Sam Mendes gives us a refreshing take on the story which works well, though which initially seems at odds with the idea of a suave secret agent in his prime. Here Bond is more mature, having been shot and officially dead for some time he is a little out of shape and finding it hard to be the strong care free hero that Bond has been for the better part of fifty years.

Mendes sets 007 against a villain (Silva, played well by Javier Bardem) that, for once, manages to be highly intelligent without revealing his plans (as previous Bond villains were prone to do). He has some very effective over the top moments (including using a train as a makeshift bullet, and a slightly cheesey yet fun entrance using a helicopter gunship) but ultimately toward the end drifts into being a somewhat less intelligent and more blunt opponent.

Does Craig ooze charisma and charm, does he finally make the character his own?

Well yes, and no.

Craig doesn't ooze charisma, or charm, but then he isn't meant to. This Bond is out of shape and more a blunt knife than the delicate blade of a surgeon we're used to. He isn't graceful or dropping funny one liners every few minutes (though there are of course one liners scattered throughout the film) but this works well, Bond has evolved into something similar yet also different to what you might expect.

Craig had, before the success of Skyfall, wanted to step down and let someone else take over as James Bond however having been convinced to sign up for two more outings as the super secret agent, and with the movie having already taken in much more than its $200 million budget, the future is looking good for the franchise.

Skyfall breaks a few Bond "rules", not least of which is that it doesn't end with Bond foiling a psychotic villains plan at the last minute and getting the girl, it also has a surprise toward the end that will have some fans doing a double take to see if what they think happened in the church really did and sets up a couple of characters which long time fans of the films should appreciate.

So we've got a film that sets up some key 'new' characters, delves a little into their histories and that of Bond himself and sees 007 evolve into something a little different. What next?

Well, contrary to popular reports there are not plans for a two part Bond outing with one plot spread over two movies, this rumour came about because screen writer John Logan is to write the next two Bond films and once pitched a two part Bond story however star Daniel Craig has denied that this will be the case.

However there will be at least two more James Bond movies both written by Skyfall co-writer John Logan and starring Daniel Craig, possibly with the same villain appearing in both ( it would not be a two parter but could, as has happened with past films, feature a recurring character) and undoubtedly (thanks to the success of Skyfall) with an even bigger budget.

Love him or loathe him, Bond is most definitely back.

Note: if you have an ios or Android powered phone or tablet and prefer reading offline check out the google currents magazine version of the blog here.

Ten things you never knew were patented

The wheel, the bible and human dna...,all things that are patented, believe it or not.

The face of the man in the moon, yes the illusion of seeing a face in the moon, is patented as is the act of swinging on a swing and, just as surprisingly the steering wheel is also patented.

Pressing the page up or page down keys to scroll up or down a page has been patented, courtesy of Microsoft, and yes even one of the oldest inventions known to man, the wheel, has itself been patented (back in 2001) and while most of these patents are American the UK manages to hold a little known yet surprising patent of its own that, unlike most patents, will never end.

The bible.

Yes, THE bible.

The bible, specifically the 1611 King James Version, is copyright and patented by the UK crown (the royal family) and as such never runs out. The patent is only applicable in countries ruled by the crown but still, it is an unexpected thing to be patented.

If you use apps on your phone while making a phone call, or you use a keyboard on your phone or tablet that can display either letters and numbers or symbols then you are unwittingly breaking two of Apples patents and if you use a laser pointer to exercise your pet, well, you guessed it - using a handheld laser device to get a pets attention is also patented.

And last but by no means least your dna is also patented, or at least 20% is. The American patent office have over the years granted over fourty thousand patents on different sections of the human genome which covers 20% of all dna found inside each and every human being.

iPad Mini - worth the hype?

It's official, after months of speculation Apple have officially unveiled the iPad mini, but will the specs have buyers keen to part with their cash or will it leave them asking the question "why"?

Intended to compete with the likes of Googles Nexus 7 (£189 for 16 gigabyte model) and Amazons Kindle Fire HD (£169 for 16 gigabyte model) the new iPad Mini starts at £269 (for the lowest ,16 gigabyte, model) but unfortunately for Apple it's unlikely that tablet buyers keen on reading ebooks or watching high definition video will be tempted should they look in detail at just what they get for the extra money.

The main reason is the Mini's resolution which is not, as might have been expected, a retina display but is instead 1024 x 768 with a pixel density of 163 ppi.

Compared to the 1280 x 800 of the Nexus 7 and the Kindle Fire HD (both of which also have a pixel density of 216 ppi) the iPad Mini loses out to its two main rivals in what is a key area for consumers, with both key challengers having screens that display more detail and at a higher resolution.

As expected there is no NFC but this isn't going to be an issue as although Googles Nexus 7 does have it most similar size tablets to Apples 7.9 inch entry model don't and the majority of potential customers are unlikely to be deterred by the lack of it.

The iPad mini has one key advantage over most rivals, a five mega pixel rear facing camera in addition to the front facing camera it and all its competitors also have, something that may attract those that fancy being able to snap some pics with their tablet but what about the meat of the iPad Mini, the key elements that can make or break a sale?

While it loses out on screen resolution and density it does have a decent cpu and gpu, the dual core A5 processor found in the iPhone 4S which is no slouch and compares well to the Tegra 3 processor used in the  Nexus 7 and the Omap 4460 used in the Kindle Fire HD (the larger 8.9 inch version of the Kindle uses an Omap 4470).

By not having to drive a retina display Apples A5 processor easily competes when it comes to games and processor intensive applications.

Apples trade off here is that to give the processor that edge in performance, and improve battery life (the Mini's battery life, between charges, is ten hours) they use a lower resolution screen so that where the processor usually has to power a high resolution retina screen here it can conserve that energy albeit by losing out to the competition in terms of screen quality, or more specifically the amount of detail it can display in comparison to competing tablets of a similar size.

It is important to note here that dearer models of the Mini will be available that have more storage and also 3G and 4G connectivity but for purposes of comparison we're just looking at the starter level wifi only iPad mini and the two main competitors that have the same storage and similar size.

Apples iPad mini has a slightly larger display size, physically, despite its lower resolution and that means that when it comes to on screen graphics it offers less detail but does so on a bigger screen which makes that lower resolution more noticeable.

For this reason extended viewing of documents (such as e-books or pdf files) is going to be easier on the eyes and more enjoyable on a Nexus 7 or Kindle Fire HD than it is on an iPad Mini and with Apple apparently aiming at these devices it seems something of an oversight not to compete on resolution (all the tablets mentioned, including the Mini use an IPS display).

The truth is that some people will buy the iPad mini simply because they want an Apple product, regardless of the specs, and it does have advantages (for example iOS devices often get games and other applications before their competitors do) but that lower quality screen is what will likely be the deciding factor for many potential buyers.

Lacking the high clarity screen typically associated with Apple products this could be the Achilles heel of the new  model, overall the product is a decent offering but with a significantly higher starting price than the competition  for what is, ignoring the screen, a similar specced device (as regards actual performance) to them customers might well wonder just why the iPad Mini deserves their cash.

The iPad mini can be pre ordered from November the second.

Apples new patent puts old foes back in the firing line

Apples newest slide to unlock patent not only sets the scene for yet more lawsuits against Android rivals but puts old ones, who implemented alternative slide to unlock methods in order to avoid legal action, back in the Cupertino giants firing line.

Apples new unlock patent gives them exclusive ownership of using a slide motion in any way to unlock a device, Android device maker had previously been able to work around the patents and avoid legal conflict but with the new patent this will be much harder for them to do.

Patent 8286103B2 is a clever, if sneaky, move by Apple. Android device makers changed their unlock methods to use different motions such as up and down or circular, Apple cottoned on to this and now have a patent that means these workaround methods still violate at least one Apple patent and, as a result, any mobile device manufacturer using slide to unlock methods of any type can now, in theory, be successfully sued by the company.

It may have surprised many that Apple were awarded its original slide to unlock patents when they were clearly invalidated by examples of prior art such as the NeoNode n1m (announced two years before the iPhones release, and eleven months before Apples original patent filing) but what may be even more surprising is that the company have managed to patent their rivals already existing workaround methods so as to invalidate them.

[Review] CoPilot Live Premium for Android

Googles satellite navigation app for Android is pretty good. The price can't be beaten (it's free), the directions are spoken well in advance of when you need to take them and it does a good job at getting you from A to B, so can an app that you have to pay for, such as CoPilot, really compete?

The first note worthy difference between Googles offering and CoPilot is that CoPilot can navigate without needing a data connection, for many users this won't be an issue but for those with no mobile data connection or for those who travel in areas where a network signal is sometimes unavailable this will undoubtedly be a big tick in its favour.

The second note worthy difference is that CoPilot has a wide variety of very good voices to choose from so that you aren't stuck with just the voice, or voices, that you already have installed on your Android. It also has another very big advantage over its free Google rival, customisation.

You can customise the speeds for any type of road, set it to avoid specific types of road (such as motorways, dual carriage ways, toll roads, etcetera) and do so for specific vehicle types. So if you want to avoid motorways when riding a motorcycle but not when driving a car, you can.

Further customisation options include the ability to show specific points of interest, the ability to edit your route to either add or remove specific locations, being able to have the application automatically switch from showing a list of directions to showing a layout of the road ahead and highlight the exact turn you need to take (complete with a visual depiction of what lane you should be in), the ability to choose from a variety of different map styles as well as being able to change the units of measurement used (metric or imperial).

You can also tell the app how far in advance of turns you wish to be notified, enable or disable its ClearView feature which, if enabled, will show you the lane you need to be in before a turn or customise the view of the maps so that they adapt to the time of day, making them easier to navigate with whether it is day or night.

The amount of time it takes the app to lock on to the gps satellites will vary depending on the device you're using it on, but on an LG P920 it acquires a signal as quickly as Googles free application does, the first time the devices gps is switched on it will naturally take longer but even then it finds a signal within thirty seconds (on the P920) which is surprisingly quick.

Setting a destination is easy, however you have to enter a town or city name, then it will offer a list of streets and then a list of addresses so it is a little regimented although you can also navigate to any point of interest CoPilot finds or to coordinates that are found encoded in a photograph.

If you visit the Play store to buy the app you'll see a couple of comments referring to it being a drain on the battery. These comments were for an older version than the newest version being reviewed here and so I can't confirm or deny whether they are accurate or not, my own use has found that the battery does drain noticeably quicker than when using Googles navigation app and I would recommend that if you plan on using it for more than say two hours it would be a wise precaution to have a way of charging your Android.

However an hour long trip uses up approximately twelve percent of the battery, that's with the screen on all the time, you can set the application to not show the directions all the time or even just speak them to you which would significantly reduce battery drain however in reality if you are making a long journey and using the app to navigate it is likely you will also have a charging cable available for your device and so possible battery drain may not be a concern for you.

Accuracy is an important feature of any navigation app and having been updated with newer navteq maps CoPilot should guide you to your destination with a minimum of fuss and seems to know the right routes although it is always possible that some new local features such as a new bypass etcetera may not be included in maps for the area in which you wish to travel but in testing this has been fine.

The combination of customisation, offline navigation and useful features such as ClearView all add up to make the app an attractive proposition.

For those who do have a mobile data connection you can use CoPilots active traffic feature to reroute you should any traffic jams arise on your planned routes, it's a subscription service but free for twelve months although users have reported that it isn't always very reliable and in reviewing this app I haven't used it, preferring instead to test the features that are included in the price (yes you get twelve months free but after that it costs money and so for this review only features that do not incur any additional charge have been tested).

There are of course other offline features you can use for free including being warned when approaching speed traps (which works well although will also warn there is a speed trap in locations where speed traps are not always present, ie places with speed camera signs but no actual speed cameras).

There is also the option to navigate to gps coordinates that have been encoded into a photograph, something which may be useful if you see a photograph you like and want to get to where the picture was taken.

Rerouting is instant, another advantage of using an offline app that doesn't need to communicate with a server to check how to get you back on track.

Directions wise it gives them clearly and well in advance, annoyingly it doesn't tell you to turn left or right as expected but says keep left or keep right which could be confusing if you were meant to keep to one side of a road ready to take a turn later and mistakenly take a turn early.

Back to the maps and they are definitely more up to date than those of similar apps, easily identifying and routing through a local bypass which other navigation apps had problems recognising although the POI's (points of interest) are sometimes out of date, for example a local garage is shown which hasn't been open for a few years so while the maps themselves are fine the POI's are a little less up to date and so may not be as useful.

But back to that question of whether CoPilot can really compete with Googles app, and the answer is that yes it can, and does. At twenty pounds it may seem a little steep but is still cheaper than rivals such as Navigon which are less intuitive to use and is as good as (and of course cheaper than) a standalone sat nav system.

If you're looking for a good offline satellite navigation app with plenty of useful features and up to date maps CoPilot is certainly the best available although it does have its quirks such as the whole keep right instead of turn right thing.

That said however, and having tried most of the alternative apps, CoPilot has definitely become my sat nav of choice and is well worth a look. You can't get a free trial but there is a free CoPilot app on the Play store that gives an idea of what to expect from the premium version.

Red Dwarf returns, but is it worth a look?

Red Dwarf returned to UK tv screens this week for its first new series in thirteen years (unless you include the three part "Back to Earth" story from 2009), but with the original cast now noticeably older could they rekindle the magic that made the show so popular back in the late eighties and early nineties?

While some critics have written off the new series as okay but not great the majority of them have hailed the new series as a welcome return to form, as have the majority of fans.

Episode one of the new series, titled "Trojan", sees Lister Kryten Rimmer and Cat come to the aid of Rimmers brother, Howard, with the help of an advanced spaceship they discover (The "Trojan" of the title).

While the episode felt like it was trying to be more of a standard sitcom than before, perhaps trying to hard to appeal to markets other than the UK, it did feel more like an early series of Red Dwarf with the majority of gags working well, some laugh out loud funny scenes, good chemistry between the cast members and it had that old magic back that fans were hoping for from its heyday.

The crew look surprisingly good for their ages, Rimmer (Chris Barrie) and Cat (Danny John Jules) are both 52, Craig Charles is 48 and Robert Llewellyn is 56 yet the fact they were obviously older didn't have the negative effect some had expected.

The first episode centred around Rimmer, a nod to previous series where some of the best episodes were those centred around one of the key characters (quite often Rimmer), and saw him finally best one of his bullying brothers in that weasel like yet strangely endearing way that only he could.

Along the way there were of course some well set up comedy moments, most notably the exam question concerning a Swede, Arnolds attempt at being captain like on the radio (only to be thwarted by a chair) and of course his final words to Howard.

The show was very much a return to form, not perfect but close enough that it bodes well for the rest of the series being enjoyable and having watched it twice myself I can confirm that as with the earlier series it holds up well to repeat viewings.

If you're a fan then chances are you'll enjoy it, if you're not well then maybe you won't but with just shy of one and a half million viewers tuning in to watch the return of Red Dwarf, giving Dave its second highest audience figure since the 2009 Red Dwarf mini series "Back to Earth", it's clear that a lot of fans were keen to give the show another chance.

It will be interesting to see how many return for the second episode, which will give an idea of whether the show can be a commercial success, but if early impressions and comments are anything to go by it looks like Red Dwarf has a good chance of repeating its earlier successes.