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

1356712

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 222
    daharderdaharder Posts: 1,580member
    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.
  • Reply 42 of 222
    thepixeldocthepixeldoc Posts: 2,257member
    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!
  • Reply 43 of 222
    crift2012crift2012 Posts: 124member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by extremeskater View Post


    Flash is going to be about a three week wait for Honeycomb. Its not the end of the world. Adobe didn't give up on anything seeing Flash is used on every Android phone running Froyo.



    The reason Honeycomb doesn't have Flash yet is because they ar going with 10.2 not 10.1



    Also everyone acts as if they are being force to use Flash. For those on Android that don't want to sue Flash you simply don't install the plugin. Apple not allowing Flash is nothing more then Steve Jobs controlling content.



    Flash is a plugin if you want it then you the end user install it, if you don't you never have to install it on your system. Also on your mobile you can set flash for " on demand" so you can activate it only when you want to use it, you don't have to use it on ever website.



    It works rather well.



    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?
  • Reply 44 of 222
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by DaHarder View Post


    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.



    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.
  • Reply 45 of 222
    postulantpostulant Posts: 1,272member
    Personally, I think asking more than $99 for the Tab is pushing it.
  • Reply 46 of 222
    postulantpostulant Posts: 1,272member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by DaHarder View Post


    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.



    Post pictures of your cool Archos tablet with the killer screen customizations.
  • Reply 47 of 222
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by alandail View Post


    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.



    +1 Well said!
  • Reply 48 of 222
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by DaHarder View Post


    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.



    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.
  • Reply 49 of 222
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Postulant View Post


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



    Oh snap!
  • Reply 50 of 222
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by crift2012 View Post


    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. ...



    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.
  • Reply 51 of 222
    hands sandonhands sandon Posts: 5,270member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by extremeskater View Post


    Flash is going to be about a three week wait for Honeycomb. Its not the end of the world. Adobe didn't give up on anything seeing Flash is used on every Android phone running Froyo.



    The reason Honeycomb doesn't have Flash yet is because they ar going with 10.2 not 10.1



    Also everyone acts as if they are being force to use Flash. For those on Android that don't want to sue Flash you simply don't install the plugin. Apple not allowing Flash is nothing more then Steve Jobs controlling content.



    Flash is a plugin if you want it then you the end user install it, if you don't you never have to install it on your system. Also on your mobile you can set flash for " on demand" so you can activate it only when you want to use it, you don't have to use it on ever website.



    It works rather well.



    Yep, I wish Apple would include flash as an option, even if it meant having two versions of Safari on iOS.
  • Reply 52 of 222
    crift2012crift2012 Posts: 124member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by ThePixelDoc View Post


    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!



    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.
  • Reply 53 of 222
    postulantpostulant Posts: 1,272member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by sagan_student View Post


    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.



    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.
  • Reply 54 of 222
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by alandail View Post


    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.



    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.





    Quote:
    Originally Posted by sagan_student View Post


    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.



    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.
  • Reply 55 of 222
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by FreeRange View Post


    Apple's competitors have their heads so far up their butts that they can't see straight. They have no ability to think for themselves or innovate on their own. A pathetic lot.



    I think these companies simply use Apple for their own R&D.
  • Reply 56 of 222
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Urinal Mint View Post


    Anyone who's in the market for a specifically Android tablet isn't going to be concerned with a tenth of an inch - they want the internal hardware (CPU/GPU) upgrades.



    Not true. They just want something without an Apple logo on it. They've based their views on being anti-Apple.
  • Reply 57 of 222
    robin huberrobin huber Posts: 3,949member
    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.
  • Reply 58 of 222
    hands sandonhands sandon Posts: 5,270member
    ClicKToFlash on iOS is what we need.
  • Reply 59 of 222
    nkalunkalu Posts: 315member
    This validates Apple as the innovator and the one to catch up to once again.
  • Reply 60 of 222
    postulantpostulant Posts: 1,272member
    One word: flummoxed!
Sign In or Register to comment.