Samsung Bashes iPad's Screen, Lack of Multitasking in New Galaxy Tab S Ads

[brewcitywi]

Clearly

Clearly, Samsung has every right to create and run ads based on their product strengths. They must also live with the consequences. If the ads offend people, they might lose some business.

If they add "SF" stickers to products, I think a lot of consumers would start to actively look for them and make purchases based on them.

 

[azurehi]

Tab S, really? Even in the name of the product they copy. How desperate is this. Samsung just look ridiculous.

Who'd they copy?

 

[kdarling]

Tab S, really? Even in the name of the product they copy. How desperate is this. Samsung just look ridiculous.

Really, why would SamSung use an S in their product name?

The real question is, why would Apple use S instead of A ?

For that matter, why did Apple use Samsung Blue colored shirts for their store employees ? Why not Apple red or green or yellow?



I love summer vacation. We get so many "interesting" questions.

 

[Piggie]

For the Siri ads, yes. But for the more recent one it just says "Apps from App Store,Wifi, add'l hardware, and app subscription may be required.

Don't know about you, but showing a 30 second or longer Advert for your product, that can't do most of the things shown in the advert without buying extra hardware from other makers, kinda is misleading don't you think?

It's ok, for perhaps one item during the demonstration, like If you wish to go underwater, you need the waterproof case. But to base your product on virtually 3rd party hardware, feels a bit off.

 

[macfacts]

do you have reading comprehension problems? I think my post is pretty clear that I think the opposite and Apple adding this feature is not suddenly going to make me like it.





these are all terrible examples, all of these are things that can be done within a single application and no need for split screen OS wide and in fact would be better suited to be done within a single application. And even then probably the reason there arent many apps that do anything like this (and i think the point people are making that you are missing) - is who would want to watch 2 videos on a small tablet screen? Most people complain enough about how small a single movie is on a tablet - hard for 2 people to share a tablet to watch the same movie - you are going to watch 2 on the same tablet?

ANY possible reason you could come up with for having a split screen tablet would make far more sense to just have 2 devices - or some sort of cheaper device that is just a second screen (and maybe then you have the ability to watch 2 things)... again even on a desktop most people will agree 2 apps open on same monitor is really same as one at a time - you would need 2 screens to really see 2 apps at once (and again even then you cant really use both at once).




no logical reason...

Use your imagination. You are not limited to only 2 videos playing side by side. You can use other apps besides a video player.

Imagine being able to watch a baseball game and having a web browser in the other half showing stats of all the players. Imagine typing notes with a bluetooth keyboard and watching a lecture video on the other half of the screen. Imagine video conferencing while being able to look at your notes or report on the other half of the screen. Imagine browsing the web while being able to watch reruns of your fav tv show/baby cam/music videos in a floating windowed player. Imagine being able to open two spreadsheets so you can look at the numbers in both at the same time so you can compare. Imagine taking a picture of a document and being able to enter that data into another document later while viewing both documents side by side.

 

[Michael Goff]

And I find it hilarious when a few guys like you fail to see the point, like a regular person would.

The iPad costs the same or more, targets the same especific audience that the galaxy does, and it sells a billion times more.

This is different then saying that Samsung sells more phones than Apple. Or fiat sells more cars then rolls. Or better yet, the best example, Microsoft sells more computers than Apple.

Again, if you don't get the point, you shouldn't be allowed to post, here.

No, really, there's no difference. In one instance, you're saying that sales don't equate to quality. In another instance, you're saying that sales equate to quality. Then you're getting a snotty attitude about it.

It's more like a company saying:

"Look at us! Our tablet is better, faster, and cheaper than the iPad! And we use better components!"

And then no one buys it because nobody cares about components.

I mentioned Amazon because they touted "a million more pixels than the iPad"

The result? No one cared. The Kindle Fire has more pixels... but their app store sucks. See? It's more than individual components. It's the total package.

So here were are again in a similar situation... with Samsung talking about "contrast ratio"

Does anyone wanna guess how this will turn out?

"More pixels" didn't do anything... maybe "contrast ratio" will.

None of that negates the fact that the people here have a double standard. When Apple sells less, it's because "quality over quantity" and when they sell more it's because "quality sells". Quality cannot be proven both by more and fewer sales.

 

[Piggie]

None of that negates the fact that the people here have a double standard. When Apple sells less, it's because "quality over quantity" and when they sell more it's because "quality sells". Quality cannot be proven both by more and fewer sales.

Also if you notice, when Apple has worse specs or is missing a feature, then specs don't matter and no one at Apple thinks that feature is worth having.

When Apple specs are better and they have a feature others don't have, then it's IN YOUR FACE, or specs are better and it's a great feature, i bet you wish you could have it.

Remember all the OMG WOW Retina screen is Soooo much better than crappy low res Android screens.
Not that the iPhone is about the lowest screen rez there is on any top end premium phone by a LONG way, the screens don't matter, and it's silly to have a higher screen rez.

 

[Michael Goff]

Also if you notice, when Apple has worse specs or is missing a feature, then specs don't matter and no one at Apple thinks that feature is worth having.

When Apple specs are better and they have a feature others don't have, then it's IN YOUR FACE, or specs are better and it's a great feature, i bet you wish you could have it.

Remember all the OMG WOW Retina screen is Soooo much better than crappy low res Android screens.
Not that the iPhone is about the lowest screen rez there is on any top end premium phone by a LONG way, the screens don't matter, and it's silly to have a higher screen rez.

Yes, Apple does have a good enough brand to sell what they do. But that says nothing about the main point I was making (and you are ignoring).

 

[DPUser]

Also if you notice, when Apple has worse specs or is missing a feature, then specs don't matter and no one at Apple thinks that feature is worth having.

When Apple specs are better and they have a feature others don't have, then it's IN YOUR FACE, or specs are better and it's a great feature, i bet you wish you could have it.

Remember all the OMG WOW Retina screen is Soooo much better than crappy low res Android screens.
Not that the iPhone is about the lowest screen rez there is on any top end premium phone by a LONG way, the screens don't matter, and it's silly to have a higher screen rez.

I get your drift and don't necessarily disagree in a general sense, but when it comes to screen resolution there is a point where the the difference is not visible to the human eye. i.e. the Neal Young of video.

 

[brewcitywi]

Comparison

OJ Simpson should be allowed to create ads showing that he runs faster than 90% of men his age.

Forget about his criminal record, he runs faster.

 

[CPx]

I'm sorry I just don't buy it.if you tested a gs5 and set the display mode to cinema in the settings all the over saturated colors are gone.you also say you read the review and then bash amoled for not being bright in sunlight when the gs5 is the brightest freaking phone that has ever been tested.why would you bother posting the hate towards amoled and samsung s newest screens if you knew all about the gs5 test?

We have 2 iPhone 5 at my work and a few gs5 and we put them side by side and went on Google and on both phones the white looked more pure and white on the samsungs then on the iphones.

Contrast ratio is the number one selling point on screens and is the reason I bought the zt60 plasma and it's by far the best tv you can buy or could of bought since they are done and out of production now.

Deep blacks is what it's all about and the samsungs got that down along with a pretty near perfect color balance

Flatly put, I'm skeptical of the DisplayMate review. And I'm not the only one. Here's other reviews that are skeptical:

http://www.phonearena.com/news/Samsung-Galaxy-S5s-screen-is-far-from-the-best-heres-why_id56255

http://angeloftech.com/galaxy-s5-review-all-you-need-to-know/

http://www.anandtech.com/show/7903/samsung-galaxy-s-5-review/6

Accurate is not a word I would use to describe Cinema mode. Some colors are oversaturated, some are undersaturated, grayscales have a green tint, and overall the color response is a little weird. Skin tones aren't reliable. I saw the problems myself, and they've been noted in the reviews above as well.

Yes, the S5 has high brightness. However DisplayMate doesn't mention what Samsung had to do get that brightness. Grays go green, and the brightness is increased unevenly for bright and dark portions of the image.

Regarding contrast ratio, as long as a screen has a decent black point, I don't care about contrast ratio. I find it's not very informative, especially when comparing across technologies. If the blacks are dark enough, (and IPS LCD devices are dark enough for me) then I care more about a good and smooth gamma curve. Apple devices are great at this.

If you need super strong blacks, then OLED is great for that. For me, as long as blacks are good enough, I have other priorities.

 

[Michael Goff]

OJ Simpson should be allowed to create ads showing that he runs faster than 90% of men his age.

Forget about his criminal record, he runs faster.

Question.

Do Samsung's products have any defect that is caused by their corruption?

 

[whiteboytrash]

I hope the rumored multitasking features come to the iPad. It would be great to snap a twitter feed or something to watching sports (similar to xbox).


Did you even watch the video?

There's a lot of confusion of the term "multitasking". What you describe is not really multitasking. It is running two apps, side-by-side. Multitasking in its purest form as the ability to run and process another app in the background whilst using another.

Side-by-side multitasking is limited at best. There are not many scenarios whereby it's convenient to run two apps on one screen at one time. Even on a PC.

Tickers etc. are an exception. But that's why we have notifications.

I can see it being deployed on iOS but really don't see the value other than saying it can be done.

 

[brewcitywi]

Patents

Question.

Do Samsung's products have any defect that is caused by their corruption?

They were convicted in one of the largest patent infringement cases in world history. I think that destroys their reputation for being "original" for a long, long while.

Samsung should be doing a string of "reputation building" ads instead of touting their innovation, which has been proven in a court of law to be suspect.

 

[Piggie]

For me, being able to look at a web page link, or a YouTube video whilst using a chat client would be the most useful, having to constantly switch between the two, or stop the video to comment back in chat is just utterly annoying.

I would like to look at a web page, or a link given to me, or comment on a youtube running whilst I am viewing them, and also typing back to the person.

We all know Apple will do it, albeit they are hampered by their 4:3 screen ratio, and when they do implement it, it will be loved.

 

[Rodster]

For me, being able to look at a web page link, or a YouTube video whilst using a chat client would be the most useful, having to constantly switch between the two, or stop the video to comment back in chat is just utterly annoying.

I would like to look at a web page, or a link given to me, or comment on a youtube running whilst I am viewing them, and also typing back to the person.

We all know Apple will do it, albeit they are hampered by their 4:3 screen ratio, and when they do implement it, it will be loved.

That's why I like my Galaxy 4 8.0 with it's split screen. The 12.2 Pro can do 4 simultaneous apps.

 

[Michael Goff]

They were convicted in one of the largest patent infringement cases in world history. I think that destroys their reputation for being "original" for a long, long while.

Samsung should be doing a string of "reputation building" ads instead of touting their innovation, which has been proven in a court of law to be suspect.

That still doesn't answer whether or not their products are good. As for their ads, they seem to be doing well enough. Sure, this quarter is expected to be a slower one ...but they're still a massively profitable company.

 

[Trapezoid]

That still doesn't answer whether or not their products are good. As for their ads, they seem to be doing well enough. Sure, this quarter is expected to be a slower one ...but they're still a massively profitable company.

As is apple, which is why marketshare comparisons are pointless.

 

[rocknblogger]

What kind of poor family don't own a TV at home? Stupid ad.

I hate to tell you but there are plenty of well off families that don't put televisions in their homes by choice. Also not to mention the having family time around an iPad or other device is another way to bond closer together.

When we have our grandchildren over I'll break out the iPad to watch some children's programs so we can sit on the couch or around the dining room table just to be closer. It prevents the kids from tuning everything out except the 70" TV in front of them. And it works nicely.

It promotes conversation and a lot more interaction than just sticking them in front of the big TV.

 

[RedOrchestra]

They were convicted in one of the largest patent infringement cases in world history. I think that destroys their reputation for being "original" for a long, long while.

Samsung should be doing a string of "reputation building" ads instead of touting their innovation, which has been proven in a court of law to be suspect.

Your shoelace is untied.

 

[Michael Goff]

As is apple, which is why marketshare comparisons are pointless.

I agree, it is pointless. That's why using marketshare to determine quality, as has been done to favor Apple, is a wasted effort that only shows bias.

 

[Trapezoid]

I agree, it is pointless. That's why using marketshare to determine quality, as has been done to favor Apple, is a wasted effort that only shows bias.

The same as when its shown to favor android. The problem is very few people say it both ways. Which leads to thirty page threads of back and forth.

 

[the-msa]

There's a lot of confusion of the term "multitasking". What you describe is not really multitasking. It is running two apps, side-by-side. Multitasking in its purest form as the ability to run and process another app in the background whilst using another.

Side-by-side multitasking is limited at best. There are not many scenarios whereby it's convenient to run two apps on one screen at one time. Even on a PC.

Tickers etc. are an exception. But that's why we have notifications.

I can see it being deployed on iOS but really don't see the value other than saying it can be done.

oh, now its rather inconvenient.
but i bet you will be able to think of several scenarios should apple copy this feature.

 

[Michael Goff]

The same as when its shown to favor android. The problem is very few people say it both ways. Which leads to thirty page threads of back and forth.

That is, unfortunately, MacRumors in a nutshell.

 

[whiteboytrash]

oh, now its rather inconvenient.
but i bet you will be able to think of several scenarios should apple copy this feature.

Alt-Tab is sufficient and available on all platforms.

Doesn't really matter who had it first. I'm struggling to work on the tablet format where "side-by-side" multitasking would be productive.

Put simply; it's not. Humans have two hands and one set of eyes which can only operate on one focus area with some peripheral vision.

As soon as humans can split their brains, operate each eye independently of each other along with their arms and fingers then perhaps then it would be useful.