Bloomberg via Getty Images
Consumer Reports has given the newest iPad high satisfaction and performance ratings.
More than a week after Consumer Reports reported the new iPad can reach 116 degrees, it has given the iPad its highest rating.
The high-resolution screen of the new iPad establishes a new benchmark in excellence, providing the best rendering of detail and color accuracy we've ever seen on a tablet display. As a result, the iPad tops our new tablet Ratings, posted today. . . Performance on the new iPad ($500 to $830) was superb in virtually every other way as well. The 5-megapixel camera took very good photos. Verizon's 4G network yielded very fast, dependable connectivity to a 4G-compatible version of the iPad in our informal tests. And despite the energy-intensive display and graphics, the iPad still has longer battery life than all other tablets.
Consumer Reports said it carried out further tests an confirmed the new iPad does run hotter than the iPad 2, but that it was not a "cause for concern." It also noted that the battery didn't recharge when playing a demanding video game -- but only if the screen was "fully bright."
The report continued by suggesting other tablets were worth recommending, such as the 10.1-inch Toshiba Excite 10LE
($529), an ultra-thin tab that weighs only 1.1 pounds, and the waterproof 8-inch Element from Pantech
($449) with a 10-hour battery life. It also recommended the Sony Tablet P with a dual-screen format, but said that the iPad's display was the "best we've seen."
The love letter to the iPad continued with CR considering the iPad display so awesome that it "recalibrated our standard of excellence," and only the iPad receives an "excellent overall score" for display.
Those who defended the new iPad
may be feeling vindicated right now. The only thing we find odd was how big of a deal
Consumer Reports made of the heat and battery drain and how it's now downplaying the problems now -- but it was the publication that brought it up! We think this may have made CR seem less concerned about consumer advocacy than about sensational headlines and pageviews, and its gushing review after such high-profile criticism only makes the publication seem a little less credible.