Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Samsung to Try to Beat Apple to Market with a "Retina" Display Tablet?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
So, assuming this rumor is true, what is this bad boy going to cost [relative to the iPad 2/3]?
We have an idea what "retina" looks like, we have an idea about differences between Android and iOS. This is the only real question left when discussing competition in my mind
Edit: Left out hardware performance given the new display requirements. I'd give the edge to Apple here, but I'm sure Samsung can deliver at least a satisfactory experience.
We have an idea what "retina" looks like, we have an idea about differences between Android and iOS. This is the only real question left when discussing competition in my mind
Edit: Left out hardware performance given the new display requirements. I'd give the edge to Apple here, but I'm sure Samsung can deliver at least a satisfactory experience.
Last edited:
Have you ever thought that just maybe a rectangular shape is the perfect form for this kind of device, which it quite clearly is. Why innovate if the best solution is already in use, innovate in other parts of the design instead. I don't see too many companies offering square wheels in the name of innovation, producing round wheels is not the 'easy route', its the best route.
Samsung S8000. (released a year ahead of the iPhone 4).
And Samsung produces the panels Apple uses ...
Plus .. Apple hasn't done anything about iPad and retina so far, it is all rumors ;-)
T.
Don't bother. This is about splitting hair and deciding to look at things so it fits the anti Apple view.
Clearly Samsung copied the ipad with Galaxy and used whatever info Apple gave them to do so. They were ballsy enough to copy almost everything to a T. (BTW: Same with the phone) which shows lack of creativity.
But, and that is the hair splitting Samsung did NOT copy anything from Apple when it comes to the display. They developed their own (for once) from what it looks like.
But if one wants to use media and news channel practices and take things out of context, one can say:
Samsung did not copy Apple and leave out: when it comes to the Retina display.
With that view point they can even say: Samsung will release the first Retina display and when Apple releases the ipad 3 with Retina display:
Apple copied Samsung and now also has a Retina display, but Samsung's has a higher resolution, so Apple is falling behind, we like the larger screen anyway and all the stuff you'll be reading soon on MR by the Android crowd.
What these people don't get is that we are not paid by Apple to like them or in competition with Android.
We just want a good product, which the ipad is (iphone too) and everything integrated, so our stuff works without much of a head ache.
If they think the Galaxy and Android is a good product that's fine with me too. Go buy it and be happy.
I am not in a contest of OS's, where I need to be the winner because I have an Apple product. When the next best thing comes along we will all switch and never look back.
Well, they might know if you were right. Unfortunately, you're confused about a few points, so you're spreading misinformation.
Even Android 1.0 had hardware-accelerated graphics for the UI. The problem with the design of Android which gives it that 'laggy' feel (even on hardware more powerful than the iPhone, and with a lower resolution screen) is that the rendering is all done on the main thread of the application, at normal priority. That means any work you're doing in that thread takes away from the ability of the OS to render your application smoothly.
It's a bad design decision for a touch-based UI that was a perfectly good design decision for the d-pad and keyboard based UI for which Android was originally built. That hasn't changed with Honeycomb or Ice Cream Sandwich, because (apparently) changing that would require a completely new API which would break the existing apps. (That's info straight from the horse's mouth, by the way.)
When the Android crew was rejiggering things for touch, they bet that hardware would improve quickly enough to make the weakness of their earlier graphics subsystem decision a moot point. It's come close so far with the higher-end Android smartphones. Not perfect, but close enough in. But if we're suddenly quadrupling the pixel-count it has to render, it's going to get worse before it gets better.
Expect to hear a lot of complaints from Android app developers about how the graphics API changes for Android 4.1 or 5.0 (whichever designation they give it) means they have to completely rewrite parts of their apps. It'll make things better in the long run, but it'll also cause a *whole* lot of headaches in the process. And given the rate at which Android phones get updated to new OS versions, it'll mean that the OS either has to support both graphics APIs, pretty much forever, or there will be a hard cut-off where apps written for anything 4.0 or before simply won't run on 4.1/5.0.
Shame it's still smartphone-only and that they've made intentions that a tablet version of Bada won't be coming to the UK anytime soon (link - no good for me as I'm in the UK). I don't understand why companies make these commitments.
Android is still their number one software bum-chum. It's android's domination that's stopping any hardware manufacture taking a slice of Apple's huge share. Personally, Google aren't putting out enough marketing to push their own platform. Microsoft have only just woken up to that fact too late when realising iMac's/MacBook's were chunking away at a decreasing PC computer market.
The reality is this revelation will not damage the iPad popularity train. As long as Apple continue to market their products like they always have done and don't annoy customers.
PC computer market is still increasing. Not much, but enough to provide growth in the market.
My iPhone 4S stutters at time. What's your point ?
And now you know
So do you
----------
Hum... no it didn't. So much about me spreading misinformation. Read this :
http://www.extremetech.com/computing/107995-the-truth-about-hardware-acceleration-on-android
What it had only had to do with compositing, not actually drawing the UI itself.
Why didn't Apple do this, then? And if Apple doesn't have to, why should everyone else be forced to? Perhaps the rectangular tablet is the equivalent to the round wheel - the (currently) optimal solution to a given problem.
I wouldn't necessarily go that far. Screen resolution stayed pretty solidly within the 72-95ppi range between 1994 and 2009. Everyone was focusing on brighter colors, higher contrast, wider viewing angles, and faster refresh rates. That's not to say that those aren't good things to work on, but nobody seemed to be working on high-res displays like these as anything other than demos to show of process capabilities until Apple decided to take advantage of those capabilities and make an actual product using them.
I agree, Apple do seem to have the strongest worshippers. Leaving the religion for anything better would be blasphemy!
Oh look, it works both ways!
I prefer the "objective, neutral" view myself.
----------
I could get a laptop from Dell with better resolution than the current MBP 13" (as in more pixels and higher PPI and better viewing angles)... back in 2001.
Oh and sorry, but the iPhone 4 was late to the game of "high resolution" smartphones.
Bitchplease. Apple 'invented' the idea that a tablet should be a rectangle with a screen on one of the flat sides. Wow, friggin' genius.
The ipad has succeeded not because of what it looks like, but because of the software (love it or hate it)
Have you used a Honeycomb tablet ?
Yes, just recently bought a Amazon Kindle Fire. Which is based on Android Honeycomb. I used it about three hours to set it up but had to repackage it for a christmas present. On occasion it was a bit laggy, but not unappreciatively so. But, also not fully tested out enough either.
Um, try reading the second paragraph of that article. You know, the one *above* the one which discusses compositing. The one that starts with the sentence, "Contrary to what we’ve always heard, Android has had some hardware acceleration for drawing 2D UI elements since before 1.0."
My iPhone 4S stutters at time. What's your point ?
His point is probably that it stutters more often. A lot of something bad is still worse than a little of something bad
that's the point. they were not introduced after the ipad.
many different companies made their products similar to the ipad even before the ipad was made public.
i'm not saying that the ipad copied them, i'm saying that the design from the ipad is not unique and that not all tablets were strange.
even this that was made in 1994 has the funny strange look from the others that were picked for the image he displayed. tablet
i'm bothered with the usual missinformation of some people that try to shove it onto others throats.
You need to learn what you bought. Kindle Fire is based on Android 2.3.x (Gingerbread)
Oh look, it works both ways!
I prefer the "objective, neutral" view myself.
----------
I could get a laptop from Dell with better resolution than the current MBP 13" (as in more pixels and higher PPI and better viewing angles)... back in 2001.
Oh and sorry, but the iPhone 4 was late to the game of "high resolution" smartphones.
Ironically, you could also get a PowerBook 12" with higher PPI back in 2001. average laptop resolutions (measured in ppi) have actually gotten *worse* since the advent of HDTV since everyone switched their LCD capacity to producing 720p and 1080p panels. But then that has nothing to do with the improvements in resolution we've seen in smartphones since the iPhone 4 was released.
If you're going to claim that the iPhone 4 was 'late to the game' of high resolution smartphones, you're going to have to provide an example or two to support that claim. The iPhone 4 had a higher resolution (ppi or pixel-count) than any smartphone I'm aware of when it was released.