I can understand Newtron trolling with long, inane copy/paste posts (it?s what he does), but please crop his absurdly long and pointless replies? if you are going to reply.
Friendly Suggestion: Go to one of your local electronics stores and hold a NOOK, Sony Reader, Kindle etc., and then go hold an Ipad.
At this point the viability, and potential desirability/superiority, of the larger-than-smartphone/smaller-than-iPad form-factor should be quite obvious.
That's just my point, I've used a Nook before, I couldn't see myself carrying one around all the time for so small a screen.
Then I guess the iPad is even 'fatter' given that the Galaxy Tab measures 190.09 x 120.45 x 11.98mm at .38kg yet the iPad comes in at 242.8 x 189.7 x 13.4mm at .73kg.
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.
You may be right about the Galaxy size/weight being perfect for this type of device, if you want a 7-inch unit.
However, it is not easy to compare the two sizes of the two devices (especially in my American units mind) to determine if one is 'fatter' than the other.
Everything is relative. You need to compare the overall sizes of the devices before you begin to start to determine if one is fatter than the other. Obviously from an absolute viewpoint, the iPad is 'fatter' than the Galaxy. It is similar to saying that I at 5' 9" and 155 pounds am 'fatter' than someone who only weighs 145 pounds UNTIL you find out that the other person is only 5 foot 2 inches tall.
Using non-metric measures the two devices measure up as follows:
iPad is about (calculated from metric units given, 2.54 cm = 1 inch and 2.2 pounds = 1 kg)
9.6 inches x 7.5 inches x 0.53 inches at a weight of about 1.6 pounds.
total 'footprint' of device (lengh x width) = ~71 square inches
Density of device (weight/volume) = 23.5 pounds/cubic inch
The Galaxy is about 7.5 inches x 4.7 inches x 0.47 inches at a weight of about 0.84 pounds (hmm, seems they say lighter)
total 'footprint' of device (lengh x width) = ~35.5 square inches
Density of device (weight/volume) = 20.0 pounds/cubic inch
In any case, the iPad is "fatter" (i.e. thicker) but three points, one it is only 0.06 inches thicker!!! and that extra thickness is for a device that has twice the footprint of the Galaxy and finally we know that the iPad's thickness is measured at its thickest point (i.e. in the center) and the edges are thinner. (I don't know if the Galaxy has a similar bottom design)
However, the Galaxy is a less dense device (i.e. 20 pounds/cubic inch VS 23.5 for the iPad, or only 85% of the iPad)
So which one is "fatter" ?
One thing for certain ... based on posted prices for the Galaxy, one thing is certain, your wallet will be slimmer if you buy a Galaxy instead of an iPad
Bogus. If it were true, then the Galaxy Tab and all the others now in production would have been first to market, i.e., they would have innovated and introduce the market... like Apple did.
Fact: Apple did NOT invent that slate/tablet computer (they've been available to consumers since 2003), nor was it even the first to market a slate/tablet running a mobile OS (that would be Archos).
Bogus. If it were true, then the Galaxy Tab and all the others now in production would have been first to market, i.e., they would have innovated and introduce the market... like Apple did.
The disputed claim was "other companies can only copy".
This is simply false. It can be true or false without "the Galaxy Tab and all the others now in production would have been first to market".
Try to follow more closely, please. It is tiresome responding to claims regarding things not said.
Bogus. It *is* true that "...other companies can only copy instead of come up with something at all original." Otherwise, the Galaxy tab and all the others currently in production would have been first to market, i.e., these companies would have innovated and introduced the marketplace itself... like Apple has already done, paving the way.
Oh... We weren't aware that you were some high-powered Samsung 'insider' that knows - For a Fact - that the Samsung Galaxy Tab will be priced at more than the aforementioned US 299.00.
Probability: You (probably) Aren't, and Don't.
... and this applies how to what I said in my posts.
As much as I hate to say it, I am glad that some new tablets are finally coming out, just so it will keep Apple on it's toes. I don't think that Apple has been resting on their early success of the iPad, but I think they may want to avoid the same quick acceptance of Android tablets as there was with the Android Phones.
I am hoping that Apple releases an updated iPad with a camera before the holiday season. Maybe to help ease the transition from the current model, add a middle-base model with a camera for say $549us. This will keep the budget buyers happy and allow for those that want the camera to pay a little extra. Could happen across the whole line, or maybe just include the camera on the 3g models.
I think the Camera may be the one item that buyers will want included in the new Holiday Season gift. It could also prevent people delaying a purchase until the iPad2 comes out.
Who know though, there does not seem to be any shortage of buyers for the iPad in it's current rendition. With new competition however, Apple will be forced to speed up the updating timeline for its iOS devices.
... and this applies how to what I said in my posts.
You're even dumber than I originally thought.
Please... Your posts were all based upon speculative pricing points (e.g > $299) for the Samsung Galaxy Tab, yet you don't even actually know what the US prices will be, so therefore any claims you made/make are but 'assumptions' - Nothing More
Fact: Apple did NOT invent that slate/tablet computer (they've been available to consumers since 2003), nor was it even the first to market a slate/tablet running a mobile OS (that would be Archos).
Fact: The Newton MessagePad was released in 1993.
BTW, it was comparatively fatter than the iPad is.
Friendly Suggestion: Go to one of your local electronics stores and hold a NOOK, Sony Reader, Kindle etc., and then go hold an Ipad.
At this point the viability, and potential desirability/superiority, of the larger-than-smartphone/smaller-than-iPad form-factor should be quite obvious.
While your at it sit in a Rolls Royce or Ferrari and see the build quality. Not everyone can afford an iPad. They go with their wallet.
Please... Your posts were all based upon speculative pricing points (e.g > $299) for the Samsung Galaxy Tab, yet you don't even actually know what the US prices will be, so therefore any claims you made/make are but 'assumptions' - Nothing More
Hint: That's How My Posts Apply.
What?! ... and you have never speculated about anything in your posts?!
Give me a break.
So you're saying that the Galaxy Tab will be a success at any price point? That it will sell well at $400... $500... $600 or even higher?
You'll sit there and argue about definitions of slimmer, thicker, fatter but you won't even entertain speculation about the success or failure contingent upon various pricing.
Comments
I can understand Newtron trolling with long, inane copy/paste posts (it?s what he does), but please crop his absurdly long and pointless replies? if you are going to reply.
You give ihm a lot of credit !
Just as I give neither of you any 'credit' whatsoever based on the dubious 'contributions' you've made to these pages.
Absolutely NONE!
In this context, it simply means using comparison as a method, which is exactly how it was used in my post.
So, to answer his question, no, not really
Friendly Suggestion: Go to one of your local electronics stores and hold a NOOK, Sony Reader, Kindle etc., and then go hold an Ipad.
At this point the viability, and potential desirability/superiority, of the larger-than-smartphone/smaller-than-iPad form-factor should be quite obvious.
That's just my point, I've used a Nook before, I couldn't see myself carrying one around all the time for so small a screen.
Really?
Then I guess the iPad is even 'fatter' given that the Galaxy Tab measures 190.09 x 120.45 x 11.98mm at .38kg yet the iPad comes in at 242.8 x 189.7 x 13.4mm at .73kg.
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.
You may be right about the Galaxy size/weight being perfect for this type of device, if you want a 7-inch unit.
However, it is not easy to compare the two sizes of the two devices (especially in my American units mind) to determine if one is 'fatter' than the other.
Everything is relative. You need to compare the overall sizes of the devices before you begin to start to determine if one is fatter than the other. Obviously from an absolute viewpoint, the iPad is 'fatter' than the Galaxy. It is similar to saying that I at 5' 9" and 155 pounds am 'fatter' than someone who only weighs 145 pounds UNTIL you find out that the other person is only 5 foot 2 inches tall.
Using non-metric measures the two devices measure up as follows:
iPad is about (calculated from metric units given, 2.54 cm = 1 inch and 2.2 pounds = 1 kg)
9.6 inches x 7.5 inches x 0.53 inches at a weight of about 1.6 pounds.
total 'footprint' of device (lengh x width) = ~71 square inches
Density of device (weight/volume) = 23.5 pounds/cubic inch
The Galaxy is about 7.5 inches x 4.7 inches x 0.47 inches at a weight of about 0.84 pounds (hmm, seems they say lighter)
total 'footprint' of device (lengh x width) = ~35.5 square inches
Density of device (weight/volume) = 20.0 pounds/cubic inch
In any case, the iPad is "fatter" (i.e. thicker) but three points, one it is only 0.06 inches thicker!!! and that extra thickness is for a device that has twice the footprint of the Galaxy and finally we know that the iPad's thickness is measured at its thickest point (i.e. in the center) and the edges are thinner. (I don't know if the Galaxy has a similar bottom design)
However, the Galaxy is a less dense device (i.e. 20 pounds/cubic inch VS 23.5 for the iPad, or only 85% of the iPad)
So which one is "fatter" ?
One thing for certain ... based on posted prices for the Galaxy, one thing is certain, your wallet will be slimmer if you buy a Galaxy instead of an iPad
Bogus. If it were true, then the Galaxy Tab and all the others now in production would have been first to market, i.e., they would have innovated and introduce the market... like Apple did.
Fact: Apple did NOT invent that slate/tablet computer (they've been available to consumers since 2003), nor was it even the first to market a slate/tablet running a mobile OS (that would be Archos).
Bogus. If it were true, then the Galaxy Tab and all the others now in production would have been first to market, i.e., they would have innovated and introduce the market... like Apple did.
The disputed claim was "other companies can only copy".
This is simply false. It can be true or false without "the Galaxy Tab and all the others now in production would have been first to market".
Try to follow more closely, please. It is tiresome responding to claims regarding things not said.
So, to answer his question, no, not really
In your strangely illogical/twisted/nonsensical/sheltered world it probably is... Have Fun!
That's just my point, I've used a Nook before, I couldn't see myself carrying one around all the time for so small a screen.
So it's not your preference, and to that 'preference' you are entitled.
For others, the 7inch form-factor may well be ideal.
Choice Is Good...
Cheer up. That is not true.
Bogus. It *is* true that "...other companies can only copy instead of come up with something at all original." Otherwise, the Galaxy tab and all the others currently in production would have been first to market, i.e., these companies would have innovated and introduced the marketplace itself... like Apple has already done, paving the way.
Obviously from an absolute viewpoint, the iPad is 'fatter' than the Galaxy.
Thank you.
Oh... We weren't aware that you were some high-powered Samsung 'insider' that knows - For a Fact - that the Samsung Galaxy Tab will be priced at more than the aforementioned US 299.00.
Probability: You (probably) Aren't, and Don't.
... and this applies how to what I said in my posts.
You're even dumber than I originally thought.
I am hoping that Apple releases an updated iPad with a camera before the holiday season. Maybe to help ease the transition from the current model, add a middle-base model with a camera for say $549us. This will keep the budget buyers happy and allow for those that want the camera to pay a little extra. Could happen across the whole line, or maybe just include the camera on the 3g models.
I think the Camera may be the one item that buyers will want included in the new Holiday Season gift. It could also prevent people delaying a purchase until the iPad2 comes out.
Who know though, there does not seem to be any shortage of buyers for the iPad in it's current rendition. With new competition however, Apple will be forced to speed up the updating timeline for its iOS devices.
The iPhone is available on over 150 carriers. I don't think we can blame ATT anymore.
blame for what exactly? if you are referring to reception, there are no complaints coming from these antipodean shores.
I really doubt Samsung has the pull to command exclusivity at a price.
Sure they do. Samsung isn't some fly by night company. They're a major player in the computer/mobile world.
... and this applies how to what I said in my posts.
You're even dumber than I originally thought.
Please... Your posts were all based upon speculative pricing points (e.g > $299) for the Samsung Galaxy Tab, yet you don't even actually know what the US prices will be, so therefore any claims you made/make are but 'assumptions' - Nothing More
Hint: That's How My Posts Apply.
Thank you.
So now fatter has suddenly become an absolute term to you! But thicker (as you correctly point out is a relative word, as opposed to thicness) is not!
Fact: Apple did NOT invent that slate/tablet computer (they've been available to consumers since 2003), nor was it even the first to market a slate/tablet running a mobile OS (that would be Archos).
Fact: The Newton MessagePad was released in 1993.
BTW, it was comparatively fatter than the iPad is.
Friendly Suggestion: Go to one of your local electronics stores and hold a NOOK, Sony Reader, Kindle etc., and then go hold an Ipad.
At this point the viability, and potential desirability/superiority, of the larger-than-smartphone/smaller-than-iPad form-factor should be quite obvious.
While your at it sit in a Rolls Royce or Ferrari and see the build quality. Not everyone can afford an iPad. They go with their wallet.
Please... Your posts were all based upon speculative pricing points (e.g > $299) for the Samsung Galaxy Tab, yet you don't even actually know what the US prices will be, so therefore any claims you made/make are but 'assumptions' - Nothing More
Hint: That's How My Posts Apply.
What?! ... and you have never speculated about anything in your posts?!
Give me a break.
So you're saying that the Galaxy Tab will be a success at any price point? That it will sell well at $400... $500... $600 or even higher?
You'll sit there and argue about definitions of slimmer, thicker, fatter but you won't even entertain speculation about the success or failure contingent upon various pricing.
LOL! Dumb boy, dumb.