Samsung's Galaxy Tab Android Tablet Now Official 210
itwbennett writes "Samsung held a media event Thursday introducing the Galaxy Tab, and making official what we've already known for weeks, says blogger Peter Smith. 'We still don't have a price or a concrete ship date (though definitely this fall; Samsung says it'll be available for the holiday season),' says Smith. 'It'll ship with Android 2.2 (Froyo), runs Flash, has a 1Ghz Hummingbird CPU, 16GB of memory, a 7" LCD (1204 x 600 ) screen and weighs about 13 ounces. They're claiming a 7-hour battery life. Two cameras: a front-facing 1.3 megapixel, and a back-facing 3 megapixel. It has an HDMI port and will also share media to DLNA devices on the same network.'" Engadget adds some video footage.
Android? (Score:2, Interesting)
I wonder what this will do to the development of Chrome OS, as now Android is also a tablet operating system, what will the market be for Chrome OS? I hope they're not shooting for desktop applications ...
Also, no WiFi as of yet (and as far as I can tell no release date set either). I wonder what this will do to battery life, and well, everything else. Surfing on 3G is acceptable on my phone when I'm stuck in traffic, at home I tend never to use my phone because of the slow connection.
On the other hand, iOS App Store doesn't need 3G (Score:5, Interesting)
I think it has to have 3G in order to qualify for the Android Marketplace.
Here's a citation for this claim [dailywireless.org]. It just goes to boost GordonBX's claim [slashdot.org] that Android makes Apple look cheap.
Very much so (Score:0, Interesting)
Something like this is perfect for huge searchable PDF's. I help run a huge LARP, and there are well over 200+ source books for material for this game system. Something like this would be awesome, as I wouldn't have to drag several pounds of dead tree around to every game, which has the added benefit of not beating up my physical copies of the books. Not to mention that when there is a rules question, I can open the right PDF, search for the rule, and answer the question then and there instead of having to freeze the game while I look things up. I am certain there are other similar real world problems that are easily solved by a device like this.
I'm not paying more than $400 or so for one however. I'll wait until the price comes down quite a bit before I pick one up. I only paid $450 for my last laptop, which currently (mostly) provides the same functionality, though it is much heavies than a pad like this.
Re:Android? (Score:2, Interesting)
Also, Google itself have admitted that Android currently isn't the OS for tablets [businessinsider.com]. They say version 3.0 will be their "tablet-friendly" Android. Maybe that's why Motorola says it won't enter tablet market until 2010 [wsj.com]. They say they want to deliver a device thats "competitive in the marketplace." I guess that means they can't compete with iPad with Android 2.2.
Re:On the other hand, iOS App Store doesn't need 3 (Score:3, Interesting)
Apple did have a huge advantage on price, they could order as many processors and as much RAM as they liked for the iPad knowing that if it didn't sell, they could just use them in the iPhone 4. No-one else has that kind of leverage on component prices, and no-one else has an established cash cow like the App Store. Android is playing catch-up on this, but I expect that Google will sort out the tablet issues soon and the Market will open up to WiFi tablets. It's mainly a matter of them realising that no-one wants to make or buy a tablet running ChromeOS.
Samsung Galaxy S (Score:4, Interesting)
So what's going on with the Galaxy S? Reports on the web are that the actual GPS hardware does not work, and the "fix" is to use wifi/celltower geolocation. How could this issue have made it past testing and 1 million unit sales before it was noticed?
On the plus side, the Galaxy S appears to be completely open source. The source code release from Samsung appears to include drivers for all hardware, including the PowerVR GPU.
Re:Soundly Trounces EEE 701 (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Price (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Price (Score:4, Interesting)
TBH though, because of the app-store lock-in, Apple ought to be able to virtually give-away iPads and still make lots of money, so I can see this battle going on for a good while yet.
Yeah, the specs are interesting, but we need the price to judge whether we might want one or not. That said, I quoted the part of your post I did because buried in the article is a more interesting little nugget: Samsung are throwing in an iTunes competitor through which you can buy and watch TV shows, movies, etc. Now taking on iTunes is a lot more interesting to some of us than taking on the iPad. If the sodding thing has a decent catalogue, decent quality and will let you buffer the movie unlike that bloody LoveFilm site, then it might have got my interest.
Re:Unlike The IPad... (Score:3, Interesting)
methinks you suffer from an acute lack of imagination and inspiration if you can't do something useful with your iPad. That said, I have a Galaxy S (which shares a lot with the Galaxy Tab) and it's a nice little piece of hardware with a few flaws:
That said, the Android platform is coming along nicely and I much prefer the Android openness to Apple's strategically founded App Store policies. I just wish you had more imagination. :)
Re:Such an Odd Product (Score:3, Interesting)
Why? The iPad fails precisely at size and weight. I think a 7'' or 8'' tablet could be much more usable.
If you have ever used an ipad you'll know what I mean: Its impossible to type with both hands while holding it in a natural position, as you would with a phone. You'll have to either put it on a flat surface (which doesn't make much sense because a laptop would be a far better option) or you can hold it in one hand/arm and type with your other hand. And unless you are holding it in your arm or on your legs, its too heavy to hold in one hand for an extended period of time.
Enter the medium-sized tablets like the galaxy tab. Suddenly you can type comfortably while holding it in a natural position only with your hands (no holding in your arms/legs ) while the screen is much bigger than on a phone. Keep in mind it weighs less than half of the ipad.
Sure, the bigger ipad screen will be better for browsing, etc.. but the ipad is somewhat uncomfortable for many users in those cases I just highlighted, making these smaller kind of tablets very attractive.
So I'm guessing that's their vision... I think its pretty good except for the price. big fail there.
Re:bah (Score:3, Interesting)
But if it has to have a 3G plan, does it have cell contract with it?
That, on top of the price, will make it very expensive compared to the iPad, especially the WiFi only version.
If Samsung is smart, they'll do something like what Apple did with their 3G plans - make them month to month, and a low & high data plan. If not, then this tablet is DOA.
Re:Such an Odd Product (Score:3, Interesting)
It fails for you, your opinion is not shared with everyone. At it's current size, I'm quite happy with the iPad, anything smaller and I would have been wondering why I didn't just wait for the iPhone4 or latest iPod touch. I don't have the weight issue you describe, maybe people having problems are a defect of the user's physique.
I suspect once we see market recognition of the iPad, the next model will cut out much of the around screen excess real estate and a slightly smaller screen with the same resolution (making it appear more crisp and clear).
Regardless, 7 hour battery life is a fail, the price is a fail, the content restrictions they're obviously trying to build is a fail, DLNA is a fail to anyone that's actually tried to use it (I have to consistently reboot my Xbox to view movies over DLNA because of small blips registering files unplayable). And no one cares if it outputs HDMI. No wifi only version, really? Why do we need to be tied to some service for this? Personally, MiFi's and Smartphones with built in access points are the wave for data only device connectivity. No one wants to pay $30-60 a month PER device to give it limited Internet capability.
Re:No price? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Such an Odd Product (Score:2, Interesting)
for the same reason Apple is working on a 7" one (at least according to rumor sources that have historically been very accurate) - for many people the 10" is too big (I happen to be one of them).
It's too big to easily carry around in an airport - I'm never going to find a coat, cargo pants, or even most small carry bags that it will slip into (one may find a bag for it, but if so then nothing else is going into it unless you get a fairly large bag). It's bigger than what I want to sit by me at the house just for looking something up on the internet - it gets heavy if you have to hold it for long. But then it is too small for most other things. It is too small for me to read for hours (and therefore put up with the size), it is too small to do real work on so I'm not going to find a large man-purse to carry the thing around in.
A 7" has none of those issues. I have coat pockets during the winter it is going to fit in and during the summer it will easily slip into any bag I happen to be carrying things in (for truly mobile I have my phone). I still can't read on it for hours or do real work on it, but then I'm not in a form factor I feel I'm lugging around dead weight so I do not care (I have a laptop or a netbook that is the minimum size for real work or reading for hours). It's small enough that I can put it on my end table and not have just it so it can co-exist with the TV remote, a snack bowl, and my drink.
So if I'm to get a tablet (not sure if I am or not) a 7" version is the only one that does me any good. The main question is going to be price, will they offer similar ones to Apple? We dunno, this one is specced closer to the top end iPad that is nearly 1000 US dollars and people are already comparing it price wise to the cheapest of the iPads (that is also the model you hear when people quote how much an iPad costs), While not really fair that will hurt.
Re:On the other hand, iOS App Store doesn't need 3 (Score:3, Interesting)
It's interesting point you bring up. All the iOS devices (except the iPod nano which hasn't disclosed the processor) use the A4. Some people were negative on the A4 as it wasn't a revolutionary processor, but I think Apple designed it for practicality. They designed one chip that, while does not contain any groundbreaking technology, can be used for tablets, mobile phones, and consumer devices like the AppleTV and iPod Touch. I do however disagree with you that no one else has leverage on component prices. This is a Samsung Galaxy. Samsung Electronics designs and makes processors (Apple even contracts them to make the A4) as well as RAM. If anyone has more of an advantage it would be Samsung.
Looking at it now, I think there was 2 reasons Apple designed the A4. The first one is stated above. Many chip manufacturers like Samsung design very generic chips to satisfy as much as the market as possible. Customization costs money and many mobile phone makers use the one that best suits their needs rather than customize it. It is rumored that Apple wasn't happy with the chip in the first iPhone. The problem was it was the chip that they specced out and ordered. Apple probably didn't have the expertise to really design the chip to what they wanted. Thus they bought PA Semi and later Intrinsity. If they were going to customize a chip, they might as well design the whole thing and not just modify an existing Samsung mobile phone chip design. Apple also wanted one that allowed them to use in as many devices as possible, not just for mobile phones. It's interesting to note that the Samsung chip "Hummingbird" was co-designed by Samsung and Intrinsity.
The second reason Apple designed the A4 was so that they were not too dependent on Samsung. Remember Samsung also makes mobile phones so they are both a supplier and competitor to Apple. Having been business relationships like this before (Microsoft, Adobe), Apple doesn't want to rely on one supplier. If something happens, Apple can simply take their design to another chip maker and have them make it.