Google, Samsung reported to take on iPad with high-end 10-inch tablet
Google and Samsung are allegedly developing a 10.1-inch tablet aimed squarely at Apple's ubiquitous iPad, with the co-branded device being the internet search giant's first foray into the high-end tablet market.
NPD DisplaySearch analyst Richard Shim told CNET that one of the standout features of the purported Google/Samsung collaboration will be a 2,560-by-1,600-pixel display, which boasts a pixel density of about 299 pixels per inch. In comparison, the third-generation iPad carries a 9.7-inch 2,048-by-1,536 pixel Retina display that tops out at 264 PPI.
Shim goes on to say that the co-branded tablet will come with a price tag befitting the bumped specs, unlike Google's current Asus-built Nexus 7.
"It's going to be a high-end device," Shim said, citing "supply chain indications."
As a side note, Shim reiterated a previous rumor that Google will start production on a $99 tablet in December, though no specifics were offered regarding screen size or manufacturer.
Word of Google's rumored entry into the high-end tablet sector comes on the eve of what many expect to be Apple's own move into a different market segment. It is widely thought that the iPad maker will try to extend its market domination downward with a low-cost 7.85-inch tablet many have taken to calling the "iPad mini."
A report earlier on Monday from The Wall Street Journal said Apple's Asian supply chain has taken orders for over 10 million iPad minis to be built over the course of the fourth quarter, which could push total iPad sales over 30 million units for the holiday shopping season.
NPD DisplaySearch analyst Richard Shim told CNET that one of the standout features of the purported Google/Samsung collaboration will be a 2,560-by-1,600-pixel display, which boasts a pixel density of about 299 pixels per inch. In comparison, the third-generation iPad carries a 9.7-inch 2,048-by-1,536 pixel Retina display that tops out at 264 PPI.
Shim goes on to say that the co-branded tablet will come with a price tag befitting the bumped specs, unlike Google's current Asus-built Nexus 7.
"It's going to be a high-end device," Shim said, citing "supply chain indications."
As a side note, Shim reiterated a previous rumor that Google will start production on a $99 tablet in December, though no specifics were offered regarding screen size or manufacturer.
Word of Google's rumored entry into the high-end tablet sector comes on the eve of what many expect to be Apple's own move into a different market segment. It is widely thought that the iPad maker will try to extend its market domination downward with a low-cost 7.85-inch tablet many have taken to calling the "iPad mini."
A report earlier on Monday from The Wall Street Journal said Apple's Asian supply chain has taken orders for over 10 million iPad minis to be built over the course of the fourth quarter, which could push total iPad sales over 30 million units for the holiday shopping season.
Comments
2560x1600? So a 16:10 tablet? Why can't we have 16x10 back where it belongs: on computer monitors!
I wonder what the Samsung fans will say when they find out it's LCD and not AMOLED.
Seriously though, by the time this thing actually ships, it will be just in time for March when the 'even newer' new iPad will come out and crush it. Oh and by the way, very few people will be willing to pay a higher price for any non iPad tablet, so it is dead on arrival regardless.
ha! ha!
In 2013 an ARM Cortex-A15 with an Img Tech Rogue GPU all at 32nm on a tablet with the display specs mentioned and reasonable battery life, size and weight will be feasible. I have no doubt this rumour is at least partially true in regards to the display resolution but it'll be too little too late. Apple's iPad (3) has a resolution that is plenty high enough so moving forward Apple will simply have a thinner, lighter, and faster iPad over the competition and no "we have higher resolution" spec sheet claim is going to convince anyone reasonable to buy their device.
I don't know. Samsung has been able to convince millions to buy a 5" phablet as there primary phone.
Take a ticket - another iPad killer is on the horizon.
My household is now Microsoft-free, except for son's Windows 7 Netbook (high school mandatory equipment). And we are all very happy, except for my son.
Funny, but students in the lower grades will be allowed iPads to school, which is good news.
Once my son finishes high school we both intend to take his Netbook together with a large axe to the nearest field to give it some tender loving care, think Office Space.
As for Android phones/tablets, I would rather dip my arms in 16M concentrated Sulphuric Acid.
Originally Posted by hfts
…son's Windows 7 Netbook (high school mandatory equipment).
If it's a Dell Mini 10, install OS X on it.
As for Android phones/tablets, I would rather dip my arms in 16M concentrated Sulphuric Acid.
You should think about getting some of that for the netbook.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
I don't know. Samsung has been able to convince millions to buy a 5" phablet as there primary phone.
And I'm jealous. I'd like a screen that big. I just don't want an Android device. Despite all the things I hate about iOS, it's still the lesser of two evils.
Galaxy tab note nexus 3 10.1???
Nexus galaxy note tab 3 10.1???
So what will be different this time around apart from some minor updates of previous failures.
I'll buy that for $1B!
This rumor just reeks of innovation.
/s
There are barely any android apps for the tablet resolutions they have now. What makes them think anybody is going to bother developing for this one? They're probably going off the same hubris that led schmitty-the-mole to declare that most TVs would have google tv in them by now. If it wasn't for the anti-apple market, these ridiculous attempts to ride apples coattails would be even more of a joke.
Millions of users or millions of units to carrier stores by carriers desperate for "anything but an iPhone"? No one knows since Samsung counts channel stuffing as "sales"...
Somebody spent $12.5 billion to not use Motorola design and manufacturing for tablets. Not saying who, just saying it happened.
I honestly think this is a very good thing. I know there may be or will be copyright issues but competition is good.
Surely the numbers aren't as high as the channel stuffing numbers would indicate but by anecdotal accounts the Galaxy Note does appear to be selling well for what I think is a Frankenstein monster of a device.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
A higher resolution and higher PPI means nothing if you don't have the SW that runs smoothly on it. Even with Butter I highly doubt Google Android can power such a display smoothly.
I wonder what the Samsung fans will say when they find out it's LCD and not AMOLED.
I think it's a given it will be a Snapdragon S4 Pro which is a pretty fast SoC. It's similar to an A6 performance-wise, and that's the problem. By next year it's almost guaranteed the iPad 4 will have Apple's custom ARM processor (maybe even quad core) coupled with PowerVR 6xx which will make it the performance king once again.
Android's problem is that it will never perform as good as iOS - it's just not as efficient. An Android device will always require a more powerful SoC and increased RAM to give similar performance. The fandroids like to talk specs (and especially RAM) but they keep forgetting that they're starting at a disadvantage by running a less-efficient OS.
I like to think in terms of cars. HP=CPU, torque=GPU, cylinders=cores, vehicle=OS.
The GS3 has 400 HP and 400 lb/ft of torque coming from a V8 engine.
The iPhone 5 has 360 HP and 1,000 lb/ft of torque coming from an I4 engine.
The iPhone 5 gives up a little in HP, but kills in torque which is what really helps in daily driving. And it does it with a smaller engine that consumes less fuel and takes up less space.
But what really kills is the operating system. The GS3 is a 4,000lb car while the iPhone 5 is a 2,600lb tube frame race chassis. This is why the iPhone 5 kills in application benchmarks (real world use) even though it's slightly slower in pure synthetic benchmarks (GeekBench, which only considers engine HP and doesn't account for engine torque or the weight of the car).