RIM unveils 7-inch 'PlayBook' tablet set to launch in early 2011 - Page 7

No, the 1 GB is not storage but system memory, and yes, the iPad only has 512 MB. RIM never mentioned how much storage would be on the devices, but most reports presume 16 and 32 GB.

In US businesses it is very common to use "sports" metaphors or analogies. It's common to say something will be a "home run" or "touchdown". And also that everyone on the "team" is using the same "playbook".

The iPad has less 256Mb. It's the iPhone 4 which has 512Mb.

What exactly will Android 3.0 bring to the table that makes it better suited for tablets than 2.x?

.

... Mysteries solved...

I wondered about the Dual Core 1 GHz ARM CPU, the 1 GB RAM -- they seemed like odd (expensive) overkill for the small screen PlayBook.

... then rthere was the undefined battery life spec.

Well, these mysteries seem to be solved:


http://na.blackberry.com/eng/developers/tablet.jsp

http://labs.adobe.com/technologies/f...ackberrytabos/

This means that developers will write apps that are interpreted/executed at runtime rather than executed as native machine language. This requires additional CPU cycles, RAM and battery -- which are some of the reasons Apple will not allow Flash on iOS.

While the HTML5/CSS/JavaScript approach has these same issues, they are open standards that can be addressed with iOS implementation.

Presumably, at some later time PlayBook will allow Java apps -- These. too, require runtime interpretation, but at a much lower (more-efficient) level.


Also, it appears that the reason, that RIM will be able to get up and running, quickly, is that they do not need to provide an SDK -- Adobe provides the Flash SDK, and Open Standards provide the HTML5/CSS/JavaScript SDK (likely, using an Adobe tool).

RIM/QNX has to provide the base device OS and expose low-level capabilities to the higher-level tools.

I expect that most system-wide services will be supplied by the QNX OS.


In effect, I think this means the PlayBook (at least, initially) will have sort of a hybrid QNX/Flash OS and SDK.

It sounds a little scary... but we'll have to see how that works out.


So, it appears as if the competing OSes for the Tablet market are:

-- Apple iOS
-- Google Android OS
-- HP WebOS
-- Microsoft Windows Mobile 7
-- RIM QNX/Flash OS
-- Nokia whatever

... Interesting

,

Uh, yeah, right

Ok, so Apple will introduce the second generation of iPad soon.

- Thinner
- Lighter
- With camera(s)
- Video Conferencing - will be a BIG Deal
- Faster
- Better Battery life
- Available in colors
- For LESS- and oh yeah, one more thing, now available in 3 sizes!

- Big one, is lighter the ANY other tablet on the market - so is bigger better?
- The mid size, is for all of you who want a mid-size tablet
- and the smallest one, is for those who want a small one

Then where will the competition be?

Companies do this shit all the time. The RIM tablet at this point exists only on paper. They have an OS that runs on the processor they are planning to use, they will copy UI from the iPad (like Samsung), webOS, etc., the SDK is Web+Flash, so they don't have anything to produce for developers (the choice of dev tools is another indication that this is a hacked together rush job, btw), and the hardware design will be a mashup of the Torch and iPad. They will try to cobble this together as quickly as possible, and early 2011 by their reasoning lasts until the end of Q2, so they have about 9 months to ship product to make their date.

But, the purpose of this is to delay customers from buying competing products. By saying early 2011, people (including some in this thread) are thinking, Jan-Mar, but that's totally implausible, other than some prototype units. If they can't make June, they'll simply announce that it's slightly delayed and will be here real soon now.

is RIM a company known to announce vapourware? What's their track record like?

That's kind of what I was thinking here. I think the reason why everyone on this forum is sort of excited about this product, is because RIM is a company with a really good track record for successful products. I don't know any other smartphone a I've overheard people saying they'd rather have over the iPhone. Plus they pretty much own the business-end of smartphones, however the iPhone and Android phones are quickly taking over that slot. So given that, it's pretty simple to understand why people are being drawn to the Playbook, not to mention that other forums on AI i've seen an overwhelming interest in a 7" iPad. So given a strong competitor, a solid looking device and a company with a good track record...this will probably be the business tablet to have for most managers.

it seems to me a few people making some wild assumptions, based on nothing.

I don't have a crystal ball that tells me the success of this, but I'm amazed at how quickly people are shouting vapourware. It's RIM, not microsoft we're talking about

I am not a techie, but do you understand the difference between (disk) storage space and RAM?
much




The iPodTouch is just an iPhone "without the phone", which has been worked around too, based on the Chinese creation.

Before it got into the hands of consumers, many all self-professed "tech analysts", like that guy from Newsweek who masqueraded as the Fake Steve Jobs, believed that the iPad, is just nothing but a larger iPod Touch. Perhaps, much like the US Sixth Fleet Flagship is nothing but a larger gunboat?

A few months after April, one could claim that iPod Touch and the iPhone, were actually the smaller iPad -- if Steve revelation would be accepted. One could say the smaller iPad has already been in place, for more than three years, going on four. The iPod Touch, never really gettting a truly competitive rival.

I would understand a 5-7-inch iPad or would welcome even an iPad in steroids ("OSX-featured" iOS, and even larger screen???). but do you really think Apple under Steve Jobs will fragment the iPad model, and in different colors so soon?

The rainbow colors of the iPod, has its origins from the original iMac, but even the iMac, has veered away from that rainbow color. Also, it was much later before the smaller iPods have been introduced, and now provided some more specific niche, because the iPods had matured.

If anything, the iPod Touch is being differentiated from the style of the iPods, and more akin to the iPhone. It may also mimic the few colors of the iPhone models (to date two -- black and white).

I am not sure that with these more complex and more delicate mobile computing models would be offered in rainbow colors so soon, if ever. Do not forget the issues with the white iPhone because of the unique casing of the iPhone 4.

Apple, because of its exclusive rights, for electronic products, may be experimenting right now or might be a direction Apple would take in the future. While at first glance, it may be costly, the features of the alloy material allows more easy and mass molding, like glass and plastics, thereby reducing manufacturing cost, significantly. Not only is it scratch-proof, its tensile strength, allows thinner walls for the casing thickness, thereby using less material and would likely be lighter than existing iPhones or iPod Touch.

If Apple is ever going to use this LiquidMetal, as casing material, rather than used for special parts, it is likely that Jon Ivy, would hide the novelty of such a material with a coat of color.

A "Dick Tracy-like" gadget may come from a future evolution of the iPod Nano. [Gadgets for kids, and young teenagers, under the blanket? No need for penlights or flashlights to enjoy those "simple pleasures", so dear and novel to younger kids] The changes in the iPod Nano, points to that direction, even if the video capabilities, were excluded in the latest version.


CGC

Wish I could have said that as well and in as few words.

.

Just to add to your comment, questioning Apple's "paranoia" or "secrecy" (one of the keys to their success) at this point is like someone saying to Michael Phelps: "I know you keep winning gold medals, but I don't like it when you move your arms like that."

The Apple ad was an invitation to the October launch of the actual product. It was a finished product by then. The 'ad' as you call it for the RIM device seem to be somewhat less than that to me. Is the actual final product there, even as a silhouette as it is in the apple invitation ad? The Apple ad, remember was done as a 'tease' so Apple could actually show the real thing live.

It's one thing to tease with a product and another to simply create an illusion of one. However, reading back through all the posts in this thread you seem to have an axe to grind but I can't figure what it is, so I doubt you will agree with anything I say.

True lol, RIM isn't MS (They had a successful product in the last decade)... but RIM might be up against the wall after their last launched product fizzled. Their share holders needed something to hope for and perhaps this is what the movie was made for. As Solipism said RIM do not have the all the areas, design, HW, SW, power management, eco system, ancillary products and CPU (not to mention a boat load of cash) mastered as do Apple. Now add in LiquidMetal ... It's going to be a tough field to plough. I don't wish RIM any harm and I hope they do well. Just saying ...

Maybe calling it vaporware isnt the most accurate. Im using it in a broad sense to mean a product that hasnt yet materialized, but I can see how others may interpret to mean that I dont think it will ship at all.

Wikipedia has a comprehensive description of vaporware.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaporware It also suggested glossyware, which seems to be a related but different from these promo videos. Maybe there needs to be a new term for this highly polished, animated marketing.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glossyware

Virtual Prototype.

Terrible terrible comparison. Bose consumer speakers sound like shit for what you pay for them. I have demoed $200 speakers against a $1200 Bose system and it was not even close in any way. Bose had poor bass quality, a significant gap of missing mid bass frequencies, muddy mids and less detail in the highs. Pure crap. They know it too, the licensed retailers are not allowed to put them in demo rooms where customers can do a side by side and the demo material they play on them has been specifically selected not to show the warts.

Apple does not advertise to overcome an inferior technical product. Apple focuses on the aspects of the products that matter to normal non-geek humans and sometimes that means technical specs are not important or are even a hinderence. Take the mega pixels of the camera as a perfect example. Apple chose a camera for the iPhone 4 that will give people a pleasent looking snapshot with little need to tweek settings. It has excellent low light capability for a phone camera, especially in video mode. To do this they needed larger pixels and therefore less of them. Sure the Evo has an 8 mp camera compared to the iPhones 5 mp, but the pictures look worse, and the videos look simply horrid. HTC got the technical specs, Apple got the part that matters to people, quality images and simple editing software.

Personally I think Apple is missing the boat on iPad 1. If they add USB ports and HDMI to the next version they will significantly increase the potential utility of the device, and widen the audience. Right now it can be a netbook/notebook replacement for many people, hence the success, but it also CAN'T be a replacement for many other people. USB ports are real cheap and would go a long way. Same for HDMI video out. A more portable 7" version would be pretty cool but I would not want them to drop the 10". As for processor speed and RAM and other specs, it needs to be fast enough and have enough RAM, but I don't care what those numbers are. Just make it work. You have to give them credit for launching a very successful first product but I hope version 2 incorporates the ideas from the soon to arrive competition, as well as the existing netbook competition, and then exceeds them. That is why this Playbook is good news. Apple can't just add some more RAM and speed up the processor for the 2011 iPad. They need to compete.

This is why I love community input! How about just shortening it and calling it a ProtoHype.

I think you contradict yourself. No one but geek humans cares whether it has these things or not.

Well, that's basically what it amounts to.

Well, I'm not really familiar with what LiquidMetal looks, or can look, like, but, hiding it would seem to contradict Mr. Ivy's design ethos.

Good comments. My thought on HDMI is Apple are all about NOT having a direct wire connection (other than the dock when needed). So I see the ATV and wi-fi as their preferred connectivity solution. Fastening an iPad to a TV via a physical cable seems retro to me. It could be streaming a movie and I'd still be able to wander around and read an e-mail (I assume). Come to think of it I wouldn't need the iPad at all unless it was my own movie or slides ...

Or 'StockHype'.

Interesting you should use Phelps in your comment seeing he is no longer the #1 swimmer in the world. Just goes to show that when you are #1 there is only one place to go.

Is there a rule somewhere that says for some, it can't go on for a really really, long time though?

.

Somewhere earlier in this thread. we discussed that it was too bad Apple and Adobe didn't get along, because Apple's iOS power management expertise could possibly help resolve the Flash battery drain issue...

If you do a search on:

QNX power management .

You will find that QNX has some bona fides in this area.

Then search for:

multicore arm cortex a9

and you will find that Samsung (manufacturer of Apple's A4 CPU) has one of the premier offerings


And if you follow a prior link you will see some of the steps Adobe is taking to address Flash Mobile performance:

http://labs.adobe.com/technologies/f...ackberrytabos/


Put this all together:

-- an overkill RAM and CPU for a small tablet
-- an OS that appears to be a QNX/Flash hybrid
-- QNX power management chops
-- Flash app development tools
-- Availability of hardware components in production quantities

If they can make the stars align, we may have a platform that makes Mobile Flash an acceptable performer.

You can decide for yourselves whether that's a good thing or a bad thing

When, how well and how much "questions", still need to be answered -- but this could get interesting.

.

I think we'll be seeing your name (picture) in the dictionary for coining that word...

My late, beloved wife, Lucy, coined the word "hornery"... but that's a story for another time...

.

Oh I'm just like that with Quadra because he is like a roach when you turn the lights on. He pops in says something stupid and then runs away back to Macrumors where he posts the same BS.

Members like him and Mouse like to cut and paste the one comment they don't like and take it out of context so it looks bad when most of this thread I have talked about how great the iPad is and how I use it daily, not to mention I have said in this thread several times I don't seem RIM touching the iPad.

The iPhone 4 can play 720p files. How does it fit on the screen???

Playback and display are two very different things. At least the PlayBook can output 1080p video through hdmi to be displayed on a TV. There is no possible way for the iPhone to output 720p video to a TV because it is limited to component cables. Hopefully AirPlay fixes this, but I'm still waiting on an HDMI dock for the iPhone/iPad. Anyone care to speculate on this? Is the dock connector incapable of transmitting HDMI video?

We were talking about this last night and I started to read about this further on another site. Which like you found alot of this started to make more sense. Also information about it using QNX and the BlackBerry OS 6 currently found on the new Torch.

What I was also reading which led me to believe this is going to be driven more for corporate use or IT use is its suppose to link to your Blackberry so you can display anything from your BB onto our Playbook without saving the data for security reasons.

So it looks like the only real way to take full advantage of what this Playbook has to offer is to also own a BB. Which is kind of interesting on some level BB going that way because that is what Apple does, tries to get you to buy into their entire ecosystem.

Oh good grief. That's just the point. Iconic is not even remotely the same as talking about or demonstrating the product's features. You (and others) have apparently missed that none of Apple's product ads are about specs. Those iPod ads in particular, tell you nothing whatsoever about how the product works. They are all about communicating music and fun. As much as anything else, they market lifestyle. It's a mystery to me how anyone can object even slightly when RIM tries to do the same thing. FWIW, I doubt they'll be able do it nearly as well as Apple, but I can't get angry at them for trying.

A very big if. Frankly, I don't think this particular tablet is going to be a big success. I think, at most, it will achieve niche status with some hardcore Blackberry shops, who want everything RIM. (The kind of mentality that until recently, when it became impossible, wanted to buy everything from IBM.) Unfortunately, I think RIM is kind of in the same boat as Nokia, adrift, without navigational aids.

I was just trying to be funny there, not deep ... and meant no disrespect on you any other poster. Actually, being serious for a moment, I just need Apple to be #1 till I sell my stock and retire then my bias may wain (Nooo not really).

RAM and Flash storage are not the same thing, don't mix them up. All my computers in my home don't have 16GB of RAM combined.

The iPad has 256 MB of RAM.
The iPhone 4 has 512 MB of RAM.
The iPod Touch has 256 MB of RAM.
The RIM PlayBook will have 1 GB of RAM and if I was a betting man I'd wager that the iPad 2 will feature 1 GB of RAM as well and launch in a similar timeframe.

When they ran is totally irrelevant to anything I am saying. This RIM video so many seems to think is completely objectionable is nothing more than an ad. Ads are created to get people interested in products. The appeal is not intellectual. Everybody does it.

That's it. Very simple. Full stop, end of story.

Fine, but totally irrelevant to any point I've actually made. Maybe you intended to respond to someone else, I don't know.

Those may become the standard specs early next year, when this launches but they aren't now, and definitely weren't early this year. Standard specs right now include a single core A8, not a dual core A9.