It's not a race to beat the new iPad, it's a race to be the 1st competitor to fall on their face trying to compete with the iPad 
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
Well, isn't the issue here that specs alone don't always tell the whole story? The premise is that apple is able to get away with providing lower specs on its products exactly because its software is custom designed to run especially well using the limited resources available. Else, why do we have people claiming the tab is slower than the ipad despite it having twice the ram?
In this case, wouldn't it be harder to have an objective discussion based on comparing specs alone, since there are so many other variable factors? Seems more straightforward to just throw it out of the window and simply ask people, "Which do you prefer using?"
BZZZT. Thanks for playing.
http://www.pcworld.com/article/240801/amazon_kindle_fire_first_impressions_solid_but_limited.html
Android 2.3 is Gingerbread. But that's ok, you don't seem to be interested enough in Android to get informed about it. What I'm left to wonder though is why you so vehemently feel the need to bring it down when you obviously aren't interested in getting educated about it ?
True, however if you think about it, Honeycomb is also based on Gingerbread (or at least based on previous code that was at the time not intended for tablets). You could look at it like Amazon modified Gingerbread to make it a tablet OS, just like Google did with HC.
So, every one that has had the greater ppi or resolution can claim that they have reinvented the displays?
Yes, and read the rest of the article, and you'll understand that those "2D UI elements" refer to animations and compositing effects, not the actual UI widgets.
I read the whole thing. Obviously, you chose to pick some out of context quotes.
While Apple didn't INVENT hi-res displays, they may end up executing it properly. Only time will tell. In this case, I'm not sure if Samsung will really go this route, however. I mean, how will they advertise it without Apple's trade dress to rip off? "Samsung Galaxy Tab, featuring Cornea Display"?
You can't realistically assess the performance of Honeycomb based on your experience using a branched and heavily modified version of Android 2.3.
I don't think the June 2009 Samsung S8000 Jet was a demo, it was an actual released mobile phone with a 3.2" 800x480 display. Samsung was certainly working on higher DPI displays before Apple released anything.
So maybe this whole stupid idea that Apple was the only one working on high-DPI mobile displays can be put to rest now?
Don't move the goal posts. This wasn't about that. (And Honeycomb was released prior to Gingerbread, if anything it's a fork of the Froyo code base).
There were quite a few 2.x tablets (the Samsung Galaxy Tab, the original one, was based off of Eclair at first and then Froyo), but Google specifically stated that the 1.x and 2.x UIs were not made for tablets.
Honeycomb brought a whole new UI concept that was made specifically for tablets. Amazon of course overlayed their own UI on top of Android, so it's a moot point what version they used as far as usability goes, but when discussing things like Hardware accelerated UIs, it's damn important.
Hence why Goal Post moving is badly seen. When a debate is about something and someone proves you wrong, the good response is to admit, not to move the debate in another direction.
Source?
Toshiba G900 800x480, 3": 311 ppi
And there were some phones and PDA's with 640x480 or 800x480 screens even en 2004
BZZZT. Thanks for playing.
http://www.pcworld.com/article/240801/amazon_kindle_fire_first_impressions_solid_but_limited.html
Android 2.3 is Gingerbread. But that's ok, you don't seem to be interested enough in Android to get informed about it. What I'm left to wonder though is why you so vehemently feel the need to bring it down when you obviously aren't interested in getting educated about it ?
I think you're touching on a very particular subject: consumer perception. The consumer doesn't CARE if it's "Gingerbread" or "Honeycomb" or "Oatmeal Raisin Cookie" or "Splenda". They know one thing for the most part: it's Android, and if it doesn't work, then Android sucks to them. If their friend has a different device, and it works differently, or can do totally different things, then that gives anyone a bad taste when Apple makes it a point to keep updating their hardware for years.
The moral: it's not the consumer's job to do research on an OS for a consumer device any more than it's their duty to know who designed the logic boards in it. It's up to the company's marketing department to clarify that in terms that people on the street understand, or pay the price. Much like it's your job to maturely explain the differences between devices in a basic debate rather than resort to insulting other posters, lest you look like a total d-bag (which is really how your post came across). No one likes someone who looks down their nose at others who are less interested in tech specs, etc. Merry Christmas!
Hum... those were provided earlier in the thread, but I think the Nexus One would be sufficient for anyone. Do we really need to expand on what is a well known fact ?
Android had moved on to 800x480 and 858x480 screens in the high-end models quite a bit before the iPhone 4 was announced. Heck, OHA manufacturers had announced their intentions as far as these displays go before the 3GS was announced and released, leading to expectations of a high resolution display in the 3GS.
Prior hi-res touch displays on a widely-available consumer-aimed tablet. No one's done it yet because the technology hasn't gotten there yet (for an acceptable price, at least). I highly doubt Samsung's QC will be the pioneer in making this a smooth transition.
Don't move goal posts. This sub-thread was about Hardware accelerated UIs, something brought with Honeycomb. The poster claimed his Kindle Fire was a good example of him playing with a Honeycomb tablet and seeing for himself the full hardware acceleration UI. I proved him wrong.
Anything other than that point is moving the goal posts on that sub-thread.
Looks like this will boil down to defining marketing, so I'll leave it here.
I'll limit myself to the most recent pre-iPhone-4 phone mentioned with a >300 PPI display, which was the Samsung S8000 (from 2009; I'll suppose the older ones were worse). I just checked some reviews from the time, and looks like they failed in something more than marketing. Like, providing good battery life, or comfortable usage, or a reason to use the comparatively powerful (and so powerhungry) processor. Even people already complained about lack of sync solutions. And the screen is only 3.1"!
So, yes, other phones already did the hi-res thing. They failed. That only means that hi-res is no success guarantee. So looks like Apple did something else (big surprise, huh?).
But I'm sure we can redefine marketing to mean whatever Apple did to avoid those pitfalls, and so we can go back to "Apple only does marketing".
I'd say a good dollop of "vision" goes there too.
Last edited:
You linked an image only prototype by a blog as evidence of something that isn't proving anything? TechCrunch and many other bloggers imagined the iPad to be similarly like a larger iPhone/iPod touch, and it turned out to be exactly as such, so who cares? If it's not pre-dating 2007, it doesn't matter.
Then that's Google's issue. With all their marketing know-how (considering they ARE an advertising company, essentially), if people don't know what Android is vs. iOS, then that's just plain sad and lazy on their part (Google's marketing division). Similar to when people call their HTC Whatever an "iPhone" because HTC has failed to set themselves apart to the point where they seem like a non-platform and non-brand.
You do understand that the displays in the iPad are made by Samsung right now ?
Samsung knows displays. That's their game. Why is it so hard for some people to recognize Samsung's part in the electronics industry ? Most Macs and iOS devices wouldn't exist today if it weren't for Samsung.
----------
The goal posts they are a moving now.
I've never seen anyone call their HTC phone an iPhone.
Samsung is a complete embarrassment and their products are blatant rip offs. I refuse to buy anything from them now or ever again. Disgusting company with no integrity at all.
Not moving the goal posts at all. I'm saying, try not to be so dismissive with the whole "Bzzt thanks for playing" and snide tone. Instead, simply make the rebuttal and leave it at that, with an explanation as to why they are mistaken rather than essentially calling them too stupid or lazy to debate with you.
So you won't be buying any Apple products in the future either ? I don't know a single Apple product that doesn't contain some Samsung parts...