Apple's iPad 2 prompts Samsung to improve 'inadequate' parts of Galaxy Tab 10.1 - Page 2

Should we refer to your comments about the the first gen iPad before it was released?

Last year dozens of companies announced tablets at CES 2010, then saw Apple's iPad and threw them all in the trash and started over. It took a year to come of with something even close, and now at least one company already admits they totally missed the mark. It makes you wonder how many unannounced products also just got delayed as it seems at least some companies waited until after the iPad 2 announcement to announce anything to avoid this sort of embarrassment.

It would seem, too, that Apple's own chip development is giving them an advantage that will only grow over time. Nobody knew what the A5 would be until the iPad was announced. The dual core was expected, the 9x improvement in graphics performance had to catch people off guard. How is the competition supposed to predict what the A6 will bring. How are they supposed to individually bring the resources needed to each do their own custom designed chips each year.

This is a whole different ballgame than the mac battling the PC clones where any kid could slap together off the shelf parts and build an inexpensive PC clone. And where the majority of the market used pretty much the same chips, causing that volume to drive down costs.

This time around it's Apple who has the advantage in economies of scale. It's Apple who had 60% of the worlds displays. It's Apple who can invest billions of dollars to gain an edge. As a result, it's the competition who's having trouble keeping up with Apple's pricing as even collectively, they don't have the resources to push the technology that Apple does.

Personally... It makes little practical sense that anyone would consider such a dubiously useful design feature as unnecessary thinness a point of 'inadequacy'.

There's little practical point in being overly concerned with a sub-9mm thickness on a device with as much surface area as a (near) 10 inch tablet computer (where's the balance?) - Other than bragging rights, and all that engineering effort would probably be better served keeping a near .5 inch profile and adding a larger battery, a more durable Gorilla glass screen, or more features.

It's all good and well that Apple is obsessed with 'thinness', but they've rode that claim into the ground at this point... the point of diminishing returns.

From my point of view, a company garners at least a little bit of respect when they come out and say as Samsung has done, "we need to make it better". No, they maybe can not beat "it"... but yes, they have to work on making it better than it is.

This is not an all evident and logical step, see Adobe.

In Adobe's situation, they owe everybody an apology, and truth be told, probably most of all, the Android fans and Adobe Flash Developers. Because it is those fans and consumers, that actually and truthfully believed in them to make it work.

Apple has the knowledgeable engineers to KNOW Flash will NEVER work in the way and with the code-base that is Flash today. But it is the FANS and Adobe's software consumers that can only hang on to the now flimsy hyperbole that Adobe has regurgitated now... for 3+ YEARS!

SJ and Apple have taken a lot of flak for the absence of Flash on their devices, but they at least get to snicker when looking at their bottom-line profits. What about the devs (of which I am not one thankfully) that waited patiently, and even spent money AND lost credibility in front of their clients, for believing in Adobe.

At this point, Adobe should fess up, and even go so far as to kill the Flash code as we know it, and start over building a true HTML5 compliant IDE.

I must say I was hoping Apple would have already done this themselves by now. I suppose their attention to nit-picky details, and having too much on their plate for the last 3+ years has stopped them, or at least postponed that project.

Imagine a canvas editor with time-line... similar to iMovie... to make interfaces for dynamic content. Now THAT would be the Killer-App IMHO!

it works ok on desktop/laptop with a good broadband connection, let's get that straight. It only works rather well offline, on a cd/dvd media (even that degrades the performance since the drive has to spin the disk up) or locally. If you have used on an older computer or one with a slower connection, "works" rather well is not the phrase i would use.

Mobile-wise, it's even worse. It is why Adobe had a big glass of STFU and sat down. You ignored the crux of my point. Flash is NOT DESIGNED around TOUCH Input. it has 4 button on(states): Up, Over, Down, and Hit. Guess with a touch-based system, you only have HITS, and then there are the gestures. Tell me how you have an over state with your finger and the screen/software recognize it? You do realize even a kindergartener understands the difference between TOUCH input, and STYLUS/MOUSE input which have buttons to CLICK on them. How do you click your finger?

What's worse have you seen most flash sites? Tiny buttons, text that you have to scale manually many x's to actually engage the HIt area if it all. With a mouse you a precision target position, it is a moot point. Most flash sites will have to be totally redone to incorporate a larger area to put your fingers, unless the site already has huge buttons and large interaction Hit areas.

Why do you think the companies that use Flash either have completely made an entire new flash with HTML 5, or they have made a mobile site. You think companies that drop hundreds of thousands, possibly millions on an online media campaigns likes directing you to their lame mobile site? You think a company would never try to use their flash site on their mobile platform to see how it works?

And you have ridden this comment into the ground to the point of diminishing returns.

Now go and email Steve Jobs that he will sell twice as many iPads if he listens to you.

If you're referring to if I've used the product, I have no intention. But, that does not prohibit me from paraphrasing what reviewers of the device have said.

I spent 45 minutes this morning listening to "Android Atlas Weekly" podcast and I tell you, you would have bet the farm that these folks were Android haters. Much of what they said trashed Android(phones, tablets, apps, OS) in a nice way. That's sad coming an Android podcast.

I bring up Flash because that's the holy grail of why android devices are said to be better than ios devices. EVERY(100%) of android users I've spoken to in person says in some fashion, I can play flash...like that one feature makes the phone the greatest ever.

Well, if that's the claim to fame for android, then the damn thing should work, out the box. Yeah, so a chuckle is warranted. Hell, if I had Apple stock i'd be ROTFL

Personally, I think asking more than $99 for the Tab is pushing it.

Post pictures of your cool Archos tablet with the killer screen customizations.

+1 Well said!

I think thinness has everything to do with the usability of the device. You said it yourself in a previous post back on Jan. 17 that the one thing holding back the iPad is its "excessive weight". Everything that you are asking for would be adding to the very issue, weight.

'Thinner. Lighter. Faster.' It sums up very succinctly everything an end user can relate to.

Oh snap!

All true and great points as to why Flash wont be around much longer.

IMO one of the biggest reasons, and one that the Android/Flash promoters don't get is that Flash is only useful as a platform if it's omnipresent. Since there is already a huge number of devices that don't support it, it really makes no difference if the performance is better/worse or anything in between.

This year, for the first time, predictions are that there will be more mobile devices accessing the Internet than desktop devices. It's a classic technology tipping point. Since Apple's devices dominate and are likely to continue to do so, any website that wants people to see their stuff pretty much has to move beyond Flash. Even those sites that don't deliberate seek to dump Flash, will still be redesigning themselves for touch and for mobile devices. The decision to dump Flash as a part of that is a no brainer even if they were not thinking of it when they initiated the redesign.

Flash is already "gone," in that sense. No matter how they improve the performance over the next few years, and no matter if they somehow manage to integrate touch events into the standard Flash repertoire, it's already dead. The twitching half-dead corpse will take a while to finally breathe it's last and a bit longer to decompose, but nothing on earth can save it now.

Yep, I wish Apple would include flash as an option, even if it meant having two versions of Safari on iOS.

I have high hopes for iAd producer.
And speaking for those of us that had to MAKE flash sites, forced upon us, because some people wanted fancy graphics/animations. We realized a long time ago that there is no flash plugin in the world of touch-based systems. Flash can not translate gestures and multi-input. It requires a minimum of a hovering and clickable input device.

He also frowned on the iPhone 4's screen resolution saying it was overkill. Then he posted a picture of his revolutionary Archos Tablet made with what appears to be patent leather and velcro straps - the guy has no credibility whatsoever.

To add to that, they also have a new Foxconn plant which meana that they can likely keep ahead of demand much better than last year, at least for awhile.

PS: Based on the act this is shipping on march 11th to the US and internationally on the 25th that this plant is fully operational. Also, how amazing is their ability to keep so many aspects of this device a secret with so many people and companies involved for this product's scale and mindshare.



I don't think he purposely tried to hide that aspect. I think he simply didn't see it. I think that is likely how most trolls are. They don't know they are trolling, they just can't see the big picture or see multiple aspects of something. It has to be stressful to be that way so I say we lay off those who can't protect themselves mentally.

I think these companies simply use Apple for their own R&D.

Not true. They just want something without an Apple logo on it. They've based their views on being anti-Apple.

I am curious as to which parts are "inadequate." Since the specs on paper are pretty comparable except for thickness. That would seem to be a case design issue, not a part problem. Unless he means getting thinner components inside to allow for a redesign of the case. That doesn't sound like a simple part swap, but rather going back to the drawing board. It should cause a significant release delay. By the time they get it out the door Apple will be putting the finishing touches on the iPad 3 and then the whole dog-chasing-its-tail thing keeps on going.

ClicKToFlash on iOS is what we need.

This validates Apple as the innovator and the one to catch up to once again.

One word: flummoxed!

You do realize that Adobe, not Apple, develops Flash?
How would/could Apple include something that does not exist: a usable, working, efficient and effective version of Flash for iOS that does not consume 100% of the battery/CPU?

Yeah I got that part.

I don't know if Apple could develop a second Safari to better incorporate flash, but I'd think it's a possibility if they were willing. I'm not expecting it though, sadly.

They only list the base specs. 1GB RAM. But how fast is it? How much power doea it require? 32GB NAND. How many chips? How fast is it? How muhbpower does it use? What kind of logic board design? What kind of PMU? How many nits is the LED backlight? What's the panel type? What is the viewing angle? What are the blacks, white and color accuracy? What changes does Apple's A5 CPU have from the reference base?

It's like taking a powerlifter who is 6' tall and weighs 100 kilos, and then finding someone else who is 6' and 100 kilos and saying they can lift the same weights because some superficial specs are identical. Or in the case of the disparate OSes on these devices and drivers, finding someone who is taller and heavier and claiming they therefore must be stronger. (tried really hard not to use a car analogy )

I bet when iFixit takes this apart we'll find the logic board very similiar to the iPhone 4 with double stacked silicon allowing the battery to be the same volume over a larger area.

While I would like it if all websites were accessible (no matter how terrible they may be, but sometimes I really need that restaurant's number) the fact is that Flash is dying a slow death ONLY because iOS does not support it. If iOS did, Flash would not be going away the way it is now.

That death has been prolonged, because Google, the "Do No Evil" "Open" lovers, decided that a closed proprietary platform was actually the best Internet platform, all technical and design evidence indicating otherwise. Which is why they worked hard with Adobe for 2 (!!!) years to get a functioning (but still terrible) version of Flash on Android. And bundled Flash into their Chrome browser (where its not a plugin anymore).

Controlling what content? flash videos? Most video sites have figure out how to play videos withour flash (really not that hard to figure out) so that even you tube content embedded in a message board plays just fine on iOS devices. And there is an alternate browser in the app store that enables
flash video from other sites who haven't figured out how to do it themselves.

flash games? How big of a loss is that really? It's been mentioned multiple times that flash isn't designed for touch input, so things don't really work right. And the native games in the app store are better.

flash ads? Who's going to complain about missing an ad.

Apple has sold over 100 million iOS devices. The number of sites that rely on flash are declining daily.

As for "it's only a few weeks delay for flash" on the Xoom. Isn't that pretty much Steve's whole point. Companies either ship with missing features or delay their release because they have no other choice. They don't develop flash, so they are at the mercy of Adobe. On the desktop, flash crashes browsers. Again an issue where Apple and Microsoft are at the mercy of Adobe. Why should they continue to do this for what used to be perceived as a core OS feature. It's no longer perceived as such because of Apple's efforts. The result are machines that are more stable and have longer battery life. Why should a technology company as big as Apple be at the mercy of a 3rd party for the reliability and performance of their core products.

The answer is they shouldn't, and 115 million and counting customers agree with them.

That 0.09 inches makes all the difference in the balance and the feel.

If the 7" Tab was priced at nearly $900 without a contract, I can only imagine what the 10" would go for.

Sounds like you guys need to send requests to that company telling them you require the virtual tours in HTML for your clients.

How were your sales staff showing the virtual tours before the iPad existed?

Antiquated Flash is inferior to HTML5 and native apps, and thats why Apple doesnt support it.

End of story.

They can't. Flash doesn't drag down the app. It drags down the OS.

I have seen no evidence to support the idea that flash 'works rather well' on these devices. On the contrary, the reports I've seen suggest that it suffers poor performance, is a dramatic battery suck, and isn't capable of doing most of what it is actually used for on the web, such as streaming RTMP. The fact that many manufacturers don't even ship it on their devices is quite telling.

I run sites that serve MP3 audio for download and via RTMP streams. We use flash in desktop browsers (because of IE), and we support IOS with HTML5. We don't yet support Android but they can still get to the normal site, and I see the Android users connections in our logs every day attempting again and again to stream the audio files to their 2.2 and 2.3 devices. Most of the time, I see them hitting the same file again and again over a minute or so period, and then they just stop. Why do you think that might be? I think it is this: the flash plugin doesn't work nearly as well on their devices as you suggest it does. I don't see ANY evidence which would suggest to me that even one of our users has been successful in using the flash plugin to stream anything at all from us. And I don't think that is a unique experience:

http://www.technovia.co.uk/2010/08/j...n-android.html
http://gigaom.com/video/video-flash-...artlingly-bad/
http://blog.laptopmag.com/mobile-fla...ves-jobs-right

I understand why people want flash on these devices, but I think it is disingenuous to present flash as a competitive differentiator for your device (or operating system, for that matter) when you don't really intend to push its use, and when it is basically an open secret that it is highly ineffective on the target platform.

I was one of the first people on the forum to have the first Gen iPad. My guess is I will be one of the first to also have the second gen. I am a fan of technology I don't bash products simply because they aren't made by Apple. Which seems to be the culture on this forum. I speak my mind when I don't like something but I am am avid supporter of Apple and their products.

Are you suggesting that this couldn't be done in HTML5? Doesn't everyone win if the developers updated away from a proprietary solution and towards open standards? If they don't, their competition will. These changes are already happening across the board and the driving force behind it has been Apple. Everyone wins except Adobe.

Overall sales were quite small.... smooth, I meant smooth.

I own and Evo so I don't have to go by what others report. THe Evo not only runs Flash 10.1 well it also had the framerate cap lifted in a sofware update. There are many times I am streaming 57fps.

streaming what? Industry standard H.264 video in an unnecessary and proprietary flash wrapper?

Open mouth, insert foot.

Seriously, how can an executive be that dumb to say that about their own product? The iPad/iPad2 are not perfect (darn close) but at least executives at Apple are smart enough not to point out the inadequate parts.