or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › Samsung Galaxy Tab to take on Apple's iPad via all 4 US carriers
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Samsung Galaxy Tab to take on Apple's iPad via all 4 US carriers - Page 5

post #161 of 235
It is an Android tablet made to look like an ipad. And since Samsung doesn't write the Android software(they get if for free), they can charge pennies for the device. And so will every other sap sucker in the tech game. There will be a slew of Android tablets on the market. And all they do is surf the next and play youtube video. They don't play nice with windows and of course not with OSX.
And Samsung doesn't have a customer service presence. They just dump sh** on the market and run.
I'll stick with my ipad 16 gig with wifi +3G thank you.
post #162 of 235
Quote:
Originally Posted by paxman View Post

Have you seen how fat this thing is http://i.i.com.com/cnwk.1d/i/tim//20..._1_610x457.jpg

At 11.98mm against 12.7mm of iPad's thickness, it's 0.72mm thinner than the iPad.
post #163 of 235
Quote:
Originally Posted by extremeskater View Post

Which is no different then the iPad being a larger version of the iPod Touch. In fact is the new iPod Touch comes with a cam and Facetime then it will offer more in the way of features.

I don't think you got my post. When the iPad was released it was called a larger iPod touch. Now the same people are try to look the other way when it comes to the Samsung Tab. If you are going to call the iPad a large iPod touch then you should call this a large Android phone.
post #164 of 235
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaHarder View Post

Personally, I find the Galaxy the perfect size/weight for this kind of device as it's much easier to hold with one hand, and considerably lighter than my iPad.

I'll be comparing both extensively the minute I purchase my GalaxyTab upon its release.

Quote:
Originally Posted by NasserAE View Post

It's just a large Samsung Android phone!

Quote:
Originally Posted by extremeskater View Post

Which is no different then the iPad being a larger version of the iPod Touch. In fact is the new iPod Touch comes with a cam and Facetime then it will offer more in the way of features.

Quote:
Originally Posted by NasserAE View Post

I don't think you got my post. When the iPad was released it was called a larger iPod touch. Now the same people are try to look the other way when it comes to the Samsung Tab. If you are going to call the iPad a large iPod touch then you should call this a large Android phone.


I think, being late to the troll, extremeskater is just engaging in schmuckenfreude.

.
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -
"He who laughs, lasts!" - Mary Pettibone Poole -
Reply
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -
"He who laughs, lasts!" - Mary Pettibone Poole -
Reply
post #165 of 235
Quote:
Originally Posted by bcahill009 View Post

And btw how in the hell does this thing not infringe on some of the ipad's patents. I mean it's pretty sad that these other companies can only copy instead of come up with something at all original.

What patents would that be? A number of Android tablets (like Vega and NotionInk Adam) were demo-ed in conferences months before Apple even announced the iPad. The WePad was shown in April unless you think it was copied in 2 months into a production unit. It's just that these are all small manufacturers and can't get them produced in mass quantities. But it obviously puts to rest that they copied the iPad if they were shown earlier.

http://mashable.com/2009/11/12/vega-android-tablet/
http://www.crunchgear.com/2009/12/18...etter-be-real/
http://wepadnews.com/
post #166 of 235
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post

There's not much that can be done with form factor. I'm sure your flat panel TV/monitor looks a lot like Phillips first available to consumers plasma TV and very much like your neighbors Sony/Toshiba/Samsung/Panasonic etc but no one yells bloody murder at that. Historically one company leads the way and others follow suit. Companies copy other companies and not just in the electronic world. Nabisco copied the Hydrox and made the Oreo. Get over it people, competition no matter how inferior is good.

I think it's rather nice. Its not a critism of the design.

I'm just amused at how the iPad was "just a big iPod Touch" to some folk and yet this new device, which looks like a "big iPod Touch", is a beautiful thing. The tribalism makes fascinating reading.
A reputation is not built upon the restful domain of one's comfort zone; it is made out of stalwart exposition of your core beliefs, for all challenges to disprove them as irrelevant hubris.- Berp...
Reply
A reputation is not built upon the restful domain of one's comfort zone; it is made out of stalwart exposition of your core beliefs, for all challenges to disprove them as irrelevant hubris.- Berp...
Reply
post #167 of 235
Quote:
Originally Posted by Newtron View Post

Man, this looks great. I look forward to the WiFi-only models.

I was really looking forward to the Samsung Tablet after buying the Vibrant. I'll have to see it to make a decision, but at the moment it looks like it's not going to replace my iPad.

1. Apple got the dimensions right. 7" is too small.
2. It's got proprietary jacks like the iPad. No standard mini USB
3. It doesn't have the fantastic SAMOLED screen. I guess the price would have been prohibitive.
4. It may not run beyond Gingerbread according to a Samsung exec at the inauguration launch.
5. The European cost is insane! And it will be a code day in hell before I sign up for yet another data plan. If the wifi only model is not around $300, it will be too pricey. Adding a useless rear camera isn't helping the price.

They did get a couple of things right. The weight. The iPad is simply too heavy. And it's got Android.
post #168 of 235
Quote:
Originally Posted by os2baba View Post

At 11.98mm against 12.7mm of iPad's thickness, it's 0.72mm thinner than the iPad.

Yes, but the ratio of xy:z is significantly higher (~ 3.5 vs. 2.0) for the iPad vs. Galaxy Tab, making the iPad much thinner, relative to itself, than the Galaxy Tab, relative to itself. Despite all the nonsense in this thread, this is the important metric when discussing the thinness of a device. The absolute dimension (which, for the iPad is 13.4mm, btw, not 12.7) is meaningful if you are making cases, but in terms of how it will feel in one's hand, it's the overall size (xy) compared to the thickness (z) that matters.
post #169 of 235
Quote:
Originally Posted by 0yvind View Post

Even Samsung admits they're aiming to copy a rumored 7" iPad. (Which I'd love to have myself... ;o)

Exactly! And as soon as Apple launches a 7" iPad in a few months, we can all see how Samsung copied it from Apple.
post #170 of 235
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Its interesting that the two newest Android tablets from different vendors Ive read about in the last day have a wonky 1024x600 resolution (1:71 aspect ratio) with one being a 7 display and the other 10, but I am under the impression that Android v2.2 Froyo only natively supports resolutions up to 854×480. So are these some add on that will make 3rd-party apps not work right, is there a 1024x600 option built in, or will these be using a version of Android newer than 2.2?

There are some preset sizes out of which 854x480 is the largest. But if you use device independent resources and layouts, the apps should work just fine. Out of curiosity, I just fired up the emulator and punched in 1024x600 and tested my app. It works just fine. Good to know :-)

Tim Bray had a post on this recently
http://android-developers.blogspot.c...metry-fun.html
post #171 of 235
A 7 " Galaxy will have ZERO - ZERO impact on a 9.7 in iPad - NONE. Consumer purchasers will look once at the 7 inch screen and laugh all the way past the check out counter with their iPads... Absolute waste of money.. - same fate as Mircoshaft 'Kin"...
post #172 of 235
Quote:
Originally Posted by extremeskater View Post

I think you don't have a clue what you are talking about. Most Tablets that come to market at least when they are first generation are going to be nothing more then a larger version of something that already exists.

As I posted above this the Samsung is nothing more then a larger version of something that already exists. In turn the iPad is still nothing more then a larger version of the Touch.

I would expect as all Tablets mature that will not be the case but you have to start somewhere.

There isn't anything about my statement that can be confused with trolling. That term is used on this form so often it has no meaning at all, its hard to believe at times this is a forum with adults.

It's probably your belligerent attitude that gets you labeled a troll.

But, you're simply wrong in equating the iPad to a large iPod Touch. Yes, the form factor is similar, scaled up in the iPad. Yes, they are both touchscreen devices. But that's where the commonality ends. The much larger screen (and very different UI) create a user experience very different from that of the iPod Touch/iPhone. At an extremely superficial level, you are correct. In every other way, you are wrong.
post #173 of 235
I know they have a contract, but does anyone know the actual (not guessed or assumed) time the Apple and AT&T contract expires? I struggle to understand why Steve Jobs stands by AT&T so much when they can go off and hype, praise and sell any competitors devices. I really-really hope Apple spreads the wealth to other U.S. carriers 30 seconds after their AT&T contract ends, because I think this is b.s. and kind of foolish for Apple to sign such a long committed contract.
post #174 of 235
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

Yes, but the ratio of xy:z is significantly higher (~ 3.5 vs. 2.0) for the iPad vs. Galaxy Tab, making the iPad much thinner, relative to itself, than the Galaxy Tab, relative to itself. Despite all the nonsense in this thread, this is the important metric when discussing the thinness of a device. The absolute dimension (which, for the iPad is 13.4mm, btw, not 12.7) is meaningful if you are making cases, but in terms of how it will feel in one's hand, it's the overall size (xy) compared to the thickness (z) that matters.

I don't even think that the ratio of xy:z is applicable to the "fatness".

According to your logic, the iPhone 4 should be "fatter" than the iPad.
Dimensions (iPhone 4) (http://www.apple.com/iphone/specs.html):
Height: 4.5 inches (115.2 mm)
Width: 2.31 inches (58.6 mm)
Depth: 0.37 inch (9.3 mm)

(115.2 * 58.6) / 9.3 = 725.88

Dimensions (iPad) (http://www.apple.com/ipad/specs/):
Height: 9.56 inches (242.8 mm)
Width: 7.47 inches (189.7 mm)
Depth: 0.5 inch (13.4 mm)

(242.8 * 189.7) / 13.4 = 3437.25

Dimensions (Samsung Tab) (http://www.pocket-lint.com/news/3522...ung-galaxy-tab):
Height: 190.09mm
Width: 120.45mm
Depth: 11.98mm

(190.09 * 120.45) / 11.98 = 1911.21


CONCLUSION: The higher the number the "thinner" it is. Why? Because the higher number means it has more surface per unit of thickness. Would you say the iPhone is fat? I wouldn't... The "fatness" of a gadget can be very subjective as numbers don't tell the whole story. Your best bet is to wait until it is out and actually feel it in your hands before saying anything is "fat" or "thin."
post #175 of 235
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

It's probably your belligerent attitude that gets you labeled a troll.

But, you're simply wrong in equating the iPad to a large iPod Touch. Yes, the form factor is similar, scaled up in the iPad. Yes, they are both touchscreen devices. But that's where the commonality ends. The much larger screen (and very different UI) create a user experience very different from that of the iPod Touch/iPhone. At an extremely superficial level, you are correct. In every other way, you are wrong.

I Agree.

When the rumors first appeared about an Apple tablet, I speculated on the optimal size-- anywhere from a 3x5 index card (would fit in some pockets), size of a VCR Cassette w & h, 8 1/2 x 11 sheet of paper (folded in half vertically), 8 1/5 x 11 full page.

At first I was put off by the iPad's display size... until I used one.

Then it became apparent that a lot of thought went into the display size.

It is big enough that the device "gets out of the way" (doesn't get between you and what you are viewing). With the virtual keyboard showing there is enough size to type comfortably, while enough display area to see the data being typed or browsed.


That's the magic of the iPad.


This is no way true on an iPod Touch-size display (or any mobile phone)-- there's no magic!


I have a 17" AluBook that sits idle... I am more productive on the iPad.

I have a 17" iMac on my nightstand... I prefer surfing, reading, watching movies, etc. on the more "personal" iPad. (ever tried to watch a movie with a Mac or Laptop on your stomach).

When I go out and about, I take my iPad and my iPhone.

When I am around the house/yard, same thing-- while watching TV I surf and browse/post the forums, etc.

I just wouldn't do that on a small iPod Touch-size screen/kb.


I do not know if the 7" form-factor will be good enough for these things-- we'll just have to try it and see.

I do not know if a larger (than the iPad) screen or a different aspect ratio is better or worse-- we'll just have to try it and see.


I do my heavy lifting on an iMac 24 with a 23" Cinema display.


But, whenever I can, I use the iPad.



Maybe the best way to say this is: the iPad is the baseline standard that I use to measure other devices, rather than the converse.

.
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -
"He who laughs, lasts!" - Mary Pettibone Poole -
Reply
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -
"He who laughs, lasts!" - Mary Pettibone Poole -
Reply
post #176 of 235
Quote:
Originally Posted by FurbiesAndBeans View Post

I don't even think that the ratio of xy:z is applicable to the "fatness".

According to your logic, the iPhone 4 should be "fatter" than the iPad.
Dimensions (iPhone 4) (http://www.apple.com/iphone/specs.html):
Height: 4.5 inches (115.2 mm)
Width: 2.31 inches (58.6 mm)
Depth: 0.37 inch (9.3 mm)

(115.2 * 58.6) / 9.3 = 725.88

Dimensions (iPad) (http://www.apple.com/ipad/specs/):
Height: 9.56 inches (242.8 mm)
Width: 7.47 inches (189.7 mm)
Depth: 0.5 inch (13.4 mm)

(242.8 * 189.7) / 13.4 = 3437.25

Dimensions (Samsung Tab) (http://www.pocket-lint.com/news/3522...ung-galaxy-tab):
Height: 190.09mm
Width: 120.45mm
Depth: 11.98mm

(190.09 * 120.45) / 11.98 = 1911.21


CONCLUSION: The higer the number the "thinner" it is. Why? Because the higher number means it has more surface per unit of thickness. Would you say the iPhone is fat? I wouldn't... The "fatness" of a gadget can be very subjective as numbers don't tell the whole story. Your best bet is to wait until it is out and actually feel it in your hands before saying anything is "fat" or "thin."

My iPhone feels "fatter" in my hand than my iPad, so, yes, I think it's a valid metric, although, perhaps not interpreted linearly.
post #177 of 235
Quote:
Originally Posted by FurbiesAndBeans View Post

I don't even think that the ratio of xy:z is applicable to the "fatness".

According to your logic, the iPhone 4 should be "fatter" than the iPad.
Dimensions (iPhone 4) (http://www.apple.com/iphone/specs.html):
Height: 4.5 inches (115.2 mm)
Width: 2.31 inches (58.6 mm)
Depth: 0.37 inch (9.3 mm)

(115.2 * 58.6) / 9.3 = 725.88

Dimensions (iPad) (http://www.apple.com/ipad/specs/):
Height: 9.56 inches (242.8 mm)
Width: 7.47 inches (189.7 mm)
Depth: 0.5 inch (13.4 mm)

(242.8 * 189.7) / 13.4 = 3437.25

Dimensions (Samsung Tab) (http://www.pocket-lint.com/news/3522...ung-galaxy-tab):
Height: 190.09mm
Width: 120.45mm
Depth: 11.98mm

(190.09 * 120.45) / 11.98 = 1911.21


CONCLUSION: The higer the number the "thinner" it is. Why? Because the higher number means it has more surface per unit of thickness. Would you say the iPhone is fat? I wouldn't... The "fatness" of a gadget can be very subjective as numbers don't tell the whole story. Your best bet is to wait until it is out and actually feel it in your hands before saying anything is "fat" or "thin."

Going to back to DaHarder’s original conclusion that the iPad is comparably thicker than the Samsung Tab, your calculations show that the Samsung Tab is comparably thicker than the iPad.

While DaHarder might argue that isn’t what he meant by his us of the word “comparably” —and maybe he didn’t he mean it that way— but it was a pointless inclusion of said qualifier which made his statement more ambiguous that needed to be when stating “The Samsung Tab is thinner than the iPad. Here are the dimensions for both..." would have sufficed.


Yes, I’d say that scaling the iPhone to match the Samsung Tab or iPad’s screen size or footprint would make it a very thick and uncomfortable device. Especially the iPhone 4 was the flat sides.

242.8 mm ÷ 115.2 mm = 2.11.
2.11 x 9.3 = 19.6 mm or 0.77 inches

That is ever so slightly thicker than the MBA, and about 22% thicker than the iPad when comparing the same height.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #178 of 235
Quote:
Originally Posted by FurbiesAndBeans View Post

I don't even think that the ratio of xy:z is applicable to the "fatness".

.
.
.

CONCLUSION: The higer the number the "thinner" it is. Why? Because the higher number means it has more surface per unit of thickness. Would you say the iPhone is fat? I wouldn't... The "fatness" of a gadget can be very subjective as numbers don't tell the whole story. Your best bet is to wait until it is out and actually feel it in your hands before saying anything is "fat" or "thin."

Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

My iPhone feels "fatter" in my hand than my iPad, so, yes, I think it's a valid metric, although, perhaps not interpreted linearly.

You didn't answer my question though. The original debate is whether the Samsung Tab is "fat" or not. I asked if the iPhone 4 was "fat", not if it was "fatter" than the iPad. If you so deem to call the Samsung Tab as fat, then in conclusion, according to your definition of gadget "fatness" then the iPhone 4 is fat too (which I wouldn't consider fat).
post #179 of 235
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Going to back to DaHarders original conclusion that the iPad is comparably thicker than the Samsung Tab, your calculations show that the Samsung Tab is comparably thicker than the iPad.

While DHarder might argue that isnt what he meant by his us of the word comparably, and maybe he didnt he mean it that way, but it was is was pointless inclusion of said qualifier which made his statement more ambiguous that needed to be when stating The Samsung Tab is thicker than the iPad. <list of dimensions>" would have sufficed.


Yes, Id say that scaling the iPhone to match the Samsung Tab or iPads screen size or footprint would make it a very thick and uncomfortable device. Especially the iPhone 4 was the flat sides.

242.8 mm ÷ 115.2 mm = 2.11.
2.11 x 9.3 = 19.6 mm or 0.77 inches

That is ever so slightly thicker than the MBA.

Thank you. Spec to spec, yes the Samsung Tab is thinner than the iPad. In real world, one has to hold the device to decide which one is (or feels, whichever language you choose) fatter.
post #180 of 235
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post



I do my heavy lifting on an iMac 24 with a 23" Cinema display.


But, whenever I can, I use the iPad.



Maybe the best way to say this is: the iPad is the baseline standard that I use to measure other devices, rather than the converse.

.

You just hit the nail. Thats exactly what most of the complaining people don't realize. The iPad has found it's proper place and usability just in the way you described it in your post. To me this happend in an astonishingly quick pace. But of course some real heavy stuff like creating complex databases or many heavy design stuff, you will always rely on computers attached to big screens and OS's that can run the respective software. But apart from that there are so many things, that the iPad can actually do better, or that it's just a lot more comfortable to use, since it is instantly available.
post #181 of 235
Quote:
Originally Posted by FurbiesAndBeans View Post


(190.09 * 120.45) / 11.98 = 1911.21


CONCLUSION: The higher the number the "thinner" it is. Why? Because the higher number means it has more surface per unit of thickness. Would you say the iPhone is fat? I wouldn't... The "fatness" of a gadget can be very subjective as numbers don't tell the whole story. Your best bet is to wait until it is out and actually feel it in your hands before saying anything is "fat" or "thin."

Finally somebody had the guts to do all the calcutations.. Thanks, and you are right the iPhone is and feels fatter than the iPad (what doesn't prevent me from loving it). And according to your calculations the galaxy will settle somewhere in between. Now since this tread is about the comparison between two tablets, and not between tablets and phones, we should stick to that, unless you want to bring TV's and home stereo and maybe dish washers in to the equation as well.
post #182 of 235
Quote:
Originally Posted by extremeskater View Post

If you mostly use an iPad you don't have any heavy lifting.

FCS, XCode, Blender...

I suggest you try regularly manipulating some large video files where, for example an 8 GB AVCHD SD card expands to 57 GB of video files... takes about 1 hour to import and another 2-3 hours to export to h.264. BTW, you can get a 45 minute soccer period on 1 card (if you are careful. We have 2 games every Saturday and several Thursday nights.

Or Motion, to animate very high-resolution stills-- say adding ripples to a stream, waves, fog, snow. rain, layering, 3D camera motion through a scene, leaves falling from trees, and other particle generation effects...

FCP video rotoscoping, green screening, multi-layer compositing, title animation such as subtitling or Karaoke (follow the bouncing ball) where the titles are synchronized to the music, motion tracking, multilayer audio blending. effects,...

I do all of these things...

IMO, all you seem to do is offer negative opinions on almost everything Apple, and add little of value to these forums.

.
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -
"He who laughs, lasts!" - Mary Pettibone Poole -
Reply
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -
"He who laughs, lasts!" - Mary Pettibone Poole -
Reply
post #183 of 235
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rabbit_Coach View Post

You just hit the nail. Thats exactly what most of the complaining people don't realize. The iPad has found it's proper place and usability just in the way you described it in your post. To me this happend in an astonishingly quick pace. But of course some real heavy stuff like creating complex databases or many heavy design stuff, you will always rely on computers attached to big screens and OS's that can run the respective software. But apart from that there are so many things, that the iPad can actually do better, or that it's just a lot more comfortable to use, since it is instantly available.

There is an app named Star Walk that illustrates your last sentence perfectly.

It shows the skies and all the stars, planets, etc., optionally filtered as how visible (to the human eye).

As you move the iPad across the horizon/sky, the display changes to match, and annotate what you see (the stars, their names, constellation drawings, etc. are superimposed).

You can search for a star and an arrow appears to guide you to the proper position.

You can manipulate time and see how the sky changes...

There is an iPhone version and a similar app for Android phones,

But, for me, the iPad size is ideal-- I have not seen anything that even approaches how this is done on the iPad.

.
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -
"He who laughs, lasts!" - Mary Pettibone Poole -
Reply
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -
"He who laughs, lasts!" - Mary Pettibone Poole -
Reply
post #184 of 235
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

There is an app named Star Walk that illustrates your last sentence perfectly.

It shows the skies and all the stars, planets, etc., optionally filtered as how visible (to the human eye).

As you move the iPad across the horizon/sky, the display changes to match, and annotate what you see (the stars, their names, constellation drawings, etc. are superimposed).

You can search for a star and an arrow appears to guide you to the proper position.

You can manipulate time and see how the sky changes...

There is an iPhone version and a similar app for Android phones,

But, for me, the iPad size is ideal-- I have not seen anything that even approaches how this is done on the iPad.

.

Yea, it's an amazing application! The rendering is very nice done. And absolutely, the size of the iPad gives just enough room, thet you can enjoy the beauty of the starry sky. On my Mac I use Starry Night for my amateur astronomy studies. But so far I have been rather reluctant, to take my MBP on field trips at night. The iPad comes in just very handy.
post #185 of 235
too tired to wade through the arguments about whether it's thinner, not thinner, who's a troll etc.

Had one these in my hands at a conferece on mobile dev, and it's a very cool device. Just, like the ipad is a cool device. Get set to see lots more of these, er, cool devices coming out. Many though will likely run android.
What I got... 15" i7 w/8 gigs ram,iPad2 64gig wifi, 2.0 mac mini, 2.0 17" imac, appleTv, Still running my old G4 466 upgraded to 1.2GHz maxed ram as a pro tools machine, and 2 iphones.
Reply
What I got... 15" i7 w/8 gigs ram,iPad2 64gig wifi, 2.0 mac mini, 2.0 17" imac, appleTv, Still running my old G4 466 upgraded to 1.2GHz maxed ram as a pro tools machine, and 2 iphones.
Reply
post #186 of 235
Quote:
Originally Posted by Groovetube View Post

too tired to wade through the arguments about whether it's thinner, not thinner, who's a troll etc.

Had one these in my hands at a conferece on mobile dev, and it's a very cool device. Just, like the ipad is a cool device. Get set to see lots more of these, er, cool devices coming out. Many though will likely run android.

sleep well and dream of cool devices. The next morning will come and its going to be the beginn of your weekend.
post #187 of 235
Quote:
Originally Posted by maccherry View Post

Getting what software right? It is an Android device. A free OS. You really think Samsung is going to do its own OS? I don't think so.

Samsung Galaxy S' not-so-secret weapon: TouchWiz 3.0

http://www.betanews.com/article/Sams...-30/1279815075

The Tab also uses Touchwiz 3.0
post #188 of 235
Quote:
Originally Posted by Newtron View Post

Why does that matter? It is not a pocket device. Being comfortable to hold is the proper criteria, not some spec.

Pretty sure that size is a pretty big indicator of weight, and weight has a TON to do with it's comfort in your hand.

Wait, I think we got off track here. Isn't this about the new iPad competing device? How's we get to handsets? Was that pic of a handset, who posted that?

All comments following are now going to be pointless argumentative dribble because someone started posting info & pics of a galaxy phone instead of the tablet. Geesh.
post #189 of 235
Quote:
Originally Posted by extremeskater View Post

If you feel I offter only negative opinion on Apple then clearly you don't read many of my posts. I am not a fanboy which I know rubs some of you the wrong way but I am far from an Apple hater.

Also what I do for a living involves designing multi million dollar systems and then setting up and installing a custom OS. Thats what I consider heavy lifting.

Having worked for IBM for the past 20+ years I would say its a safe bet that not only do I own more Apple stock then 99% on this forum but have used more Apple products over the decades.

As far as Apple products when something is good I don't knock it but it when isnt and I use the product I am going to tell state the truth as I see it. Which by the way is call an opinion.

I also don't bash products I don't use which is very common on this forum when it comes to Google and Microsoft or for that matter any company that isn't Apple.

I only worked for IBM for 16 1/2 years-- 1964-1980. Most of the stuff I worked in that era was DB/DC -- then CICS and DL/1... no relationals at that time.

I was Consulting level ( 1 of 200, out of 450,000 employees ).

My last project, with the Palo Alto - Raleigh Systems Center, ca. 1978 where
I headed a team to convince and guide the regional and field offices to convert from IBM/360 DOS to MVS.

So, while a little before, your time, I do understand "heavy lifting".

Personally, I don't bash products I've never used... Although I occasionally ridicule stupid designs or specs.

.
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -
"He who laughs, lasts!" - Mary Pettibone Poole -
Reply
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -
"He who laughs, lasts!" - Mary Pettibone Poole -
Reply
post #190 of 235
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Going to back to DaHarder’s original conclusion that the iPad is comparably thicker than the Samsung Tab, your calculations show that the Samsung Tab is comparably thicker than the iPad.

While DaHarder might argue that isn’t what he meant by his us of the word “comparably” —and maybe he didn’t he mean it that way— but it was a pointless inclusion of said qualifier which made his statement more ambiguous that needed to be when stating “The Samsung Tab is thinner than the iPad. Here are the dimensions for both..." would have sufficed.


Yes, I’d say that scaling the iPhone to match the Samsung Tab or iPad’s screen size or footprint would make it a very thick and uncomfortable device. Especially the iPhone 4 was the flat sides.

242.8 mm ÷ 115.2 mm = 2.11.
2.11 x 9.3 = 19.6 mm or 0.77 inches

That is ever so slightly thicker than the MBA, and about 22% thicker than the iPad when comparing the same height.

Please... Just Stop It Already, given that you seem to lack the ability to even quote the correct words used in my post - GEEZ!

What I posted... Verbatim was, "Have you seen how much 'comparatively 'fatter' the ipad is... 242.8 x 189.7 x 13.4mm at .73kg (Hint the Galaxy Tab is a mere 11.98mm ".

Either get it right, or give up.
"Why iPhone"... Hmmm?
Reply
"Why iPhone"... Hmmm?
Reply
post #191 of 235
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rabbit_Coach View Post

Now since this tread is about the comparison between two tablets, and not between tablets and phones, we should stick to that, unless you want to bring TV's and home stereo and maybe dish washers in to the equation as well.

Right.

iP4: 9.3 mm thick

Tab: 11.98 mm thick

iPad: 13.4 mm thick


Comparing the Tab to the iPhone is not really fair. If you were to do that, the iPhone would have to be considered obese.
post #192 of 235
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaHarder View Post

Please... Just Stop It Already, given that you seem to lack the ability to even quote the correct words used in my post - GEEZ!

What I posted... Verbatim was, "Have you seen how much 'comparatively 'fatter' the ipad is... 242.8 x 189.7 x 13.4mm at .73kg (Hint the Galaxy Tab is a mere 11.98mm ".

Either get it right, or give up.

He got it right -- compared the relative sizes, you do not seem able to make valid comparisons unless things are equal.

.
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -
"He who laughs, lasts!" - Mary Pettibone Poole -
Reply
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -
"He who laughs, lasts!" - Mary Pettibone Poole -
Reply
post #193 of 235
Quote:
Originally Posted by Newtron View Post

Hence my comment about waiting for WiFi-only models.

Hope you have $1,000 burning a hole in your pocket...
post #194 of 235
Quote:
Originally Posted by Newtron View Post

Man, this looks great. I look forward to the WiFi-only models.

Be sure to report back to us how that Verizon crapware does. Also, please list out the Android apps optimised for tablets.
post #195 of 235
Quote:
Originally Posted by Newtron View Post

Archos makes truly great products. But they have no ecosystem at all, making other choices more attractive.

And they nickel and dime you for codecs. That's better than Apple's method of simply denying users the codecs they desire, but nevertheless I find it distasteful.

Hmm I guess I must have been hallucinating that xvid movie I watched on my iPad last night (CineXPlayer and OplayerHD apps in case anyone's wondering).
post #196 of 235
Quote:
Originally Posted by striker_kk;

"One carrier" thing is Apple's Achilles heel.

Except the iPad is fully unlocked.

Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism;

Despite Apple being very slim on listing specs, they do list a good cross section of battery times and use the medium average of those times, not the minimum like other vendors.

The best I can find on this VeiwSonic tablet is a flat 10 hours. is that audio, video, web surfing, what?

Don't you know? All these Android tablets are thinner, cheaper, faster, brighter, more flexible and better than the iPad. Who needs to look up specs?
post #197 of 235
Quote:
Originally Posted by Newtron View Post

That is not the attribute under discussion. It is a different topic entirely.

The claim was with regard to thickness, and not proportions.

No, it started off by someone saying the Samsung looked "fat". So rationally one could say it is thinner in absolute terms but proportionately fatter.
post #198 of 235
Quote:
Originally Posted by Newtron;

...until the 3GS, which I use daily. Even though it has been bested by many other phones, I still use it, and will continue to do so until the category becomes more mature.

By next spring, I expect to have many, many compelling choices of phones. I may decide to get another iPhone, but at this point, with the iPhone falling behind so quickly, it seems unlikely.

I'm not sure what to say. You seem to be a captive of your desires to move away from Apple but you don't want to take the jump to Android because "the category is not mature enough". I understand though if you do want to change but do not have the budget or do not feel the timing is appropriate.

But seeing that you are in support of anything and everything Android, which exact phones or tablets would you recommend for someone this holiday season? Serious question here.

An Apple "fanboy" simply has one or two models to recommend. In the Android world, which model exactly is better than iPhone and iPad? That would be useful information rather than generalisations, I think.
post #199 of 235
Quote:
Originally Posted by nvidia2008 View Post

Except the iPad is fully unlocked.

What's your point?
Same Apple. Same Mac. Different Take. Different Place. http://Applemacness.com
Reply
Same Apple. Same Mac. Different Take. Different Place. http://Applemacness.com
Reply
post #200 of 235
Quote:
Originally Posted by striker_kk;

What's your point?

That the carrier limitation does not apply to iPad. Thus the limitation here on wider distribution in the US is CDMA, or the fact that the iPad doesn't run on CDMA.

I am actually not in the US so from a global perspective I would rather Apple launch iPad and iPhone4 beyond the few launch countries, devoting their resources to that, rather than divert resources to CDMA. At the same time though I know if I were in the US, the ATT exclusivity would be frustrating, but globally they are not immensely relevant to Apple.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPad
  • Samsung Galaxy Tab to take on Apple's iPad via all 4 US carriers
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › Samsung Galaxy Tab to take on Apple's iPad via all 4 US carriers