Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Samsung Shows Off Galaxy Tab, Android Allegiance

CmdrTaco posted more than 4 years ago | from the looks-pretty-sexy dept.

Handhelds 189

cgriffin21 writes "Samsung is making no bones about it: Google Android is its future. And with the revealing of the Samsung Galaxy Tab, the company is showing that it's all in when it comes to Android. At the IFA consumer electronics show in Berlin, Samsung finally pulled the curtain off the long-rumored and teased Galaxy Tab, the electronics maker's touch-screen tablet and answer to the Apple iPad."

cancel ×

189 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

HOLY FUCK (5, Informative)

Barny (103770) | more than 4 years ago | (#33449060)

29 cookies, really CRN.COM, is that completely required?

Re:HOLY FUCK (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33449400)

Give them some credit: at least the site works with cookies disabled. Some other news sites won't let you click past an advert to see the story without having both cookies and javascript enabled.

Re:HOLY FUCK (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33449530)

More holy fuck: way to mention "Galaxy Tab" three times in the title and summary before giving any sort of indication as to what that is. Turns out it's a model of a phone.

Re:HOLY FUCK (1, Informative)

Barny (103770) | more than 4 years ago | (#33449866)

No its not, its a tablet ;)

Re:HOLY FUCK (0)

jgagnon (1663075) | more than 4 years ago | (#33449976)

At lead they didn't name it iPood or something.

Re:HOLY FUCK (0)

jgagnon (1663075) | more than 4 years ago | (#33451484)

I think I meant to say "at least"... instead, though, one should just read it in a voice that has a plugged nose.

Re:HOLY FUCK (3, Funny)

Altus (1034) | more than 4 years ago | (#33450362)

Damnit man, read the article

"This is not just another tablet. We call it a Smart Media device,"

Oh, wait, your right, its just another tablet.

Re:HOLY FUCK (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33450396)

Yeah, why didn't this link to a site where you could SEE the tablet in pix, or a site that is at least half-ass mainstream? I had to google it to find a pic, in the pcmag.com article.

Re:HOLY FUCK (2, Insightful)

John Hasler (414242) | more than 4 years ago | (#33450032)

Assholes. I have no intention of reading the article or ever again attempting to visit the site.

Re:HOLY FUCK (1)

BeardedChimp (1416531) | more than 4 years ago | (#33451300)

Assholes. I have no intention of reading the article or ever again attempting to visit the site.

But you never would have known not to visit the site if you hadn't chosen to already ignore it and read the comments instead.

Re:HOLY FUCK (1)

nospam007 (722110) | more than 4 years ago | (#33451606)

"But you never would have known not to visit the site if you hadn't chosen to already ignore it and read the comments instead."

You must be new here.

Upcoming tablets (5, Insightful)

Pojut (1027544) | more than 4 years ago | (#33449152)

The Galaxy looks pretty sweet...but I'm excited about the plethora of tablets that will be hitting the market soon. Having choice is a good thing, and it will be nice to not have choice limited to a locked-down "appliance".

Re:Upcoming tablets (3, Funny)

pak9rabid (1011935) | more than 4 years ago | (#33449582)

...and it will be nice to not have choice limited to a locked-down "appliance"

You must be new to the mobile telecom industry...

Re:Upcoming tablets (2, Insightful)

sjstrutt (603317) | more than 4 years ago | (#33451542)

I have an unlocked Verizon android device (HTC Incredible) that I can run anything I want on. He may be "new", but you're misinformed.

Re:Upcoming tablets (2, Insightful)

bemymonkey (1244086) | more than 4 years ago | (#33449848)

I dunno, seems a bit expensive. I've been hearing about iPad-like prices (800 is floating around as a European-market ballpark figure), which is just not worth it.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not much of an iPad-fan, but 64 gigs vs. 16, higher resolution, better (IPS baby!) screen, proven reliability and battery life... not to mention the software on the Galaxy Tab looks a lot like the UI was just cloned from the iPad (check out things like the browser and E-Mail app in the Engadget preview video).

If you're spending the exact same amount of money, why not buy the real thing instead of an imitation?

Re:Upcoming tablets (3, Informative)

Chatterton (228704) | more than 4 years ago | (#33451122)

Because the development kit of the imitation is free. I can upload my own applications without the need to jailbroken it beforehand. These 2 things get me to NOT by the ipad and i am eager to have one of these babies to play with...

Re:Upcoming tablets (1)

bemymonkey (1244086) | more than 4 years ago | (#33451604)

Of course Android fans will be buying the Galaxy. I'm talking about the 30 year old yuppie looking for a new toy, or the fifteen year old girl asking for a christmas/birthday/graduation present, or Grandma wanting to check her e-mail without figuring out Windows first.

All they'll be thinking is, "Hmmm, bigger numbers on the iPad, bigger screen, shinier... do want!"

Don't get me wrong - I want Android devices to succeed as I'm a huge fan, but I don't think Samsung has a chance here.

Have you seen the new Archos offerings? They start at 300 for very similar offerings (WSVGA capacitive with a 1GHz Cortex A8)... just without the cellular radio. Unfortunately also without Android Market, but at least the devices show that they CAN be produced and sold for humane prices.

Re:Upcoming tablets (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 4 years ago | (#33449888)

The Galaxy looks pretty sweet...but I'm excited about the plethora of tablets that will be hitting the market soon. Having choice is a good thing, and it will be nice to not have choice limited to a locked-down "appliance".

I live in the United States, and I'm in the market for a 4-5" tablet, PDA, handheld computer, or whatever you want to call it that doesn't need a $70/mo service plan. People have recommended the Archos 5, but Archos has been slow to port new versions of Android to its hardware and hasn't been able to get Google to approve it for Android Market. Should I just buy a Nokia N900 and ignore the phone part?

Re:Upcoming tablets (1)

Overzeetop (214511) | more than 4 years ago | (#33451128)

So what you want is an Evo 4G, terminate your contract, pay the penalty, then root it, flash it, & boot it without a cell plan. You're out what - $500-600 - to get everything you want.

Re:Upcoming tablets (3, Insightful)

Microlith (54737) | more than 4 years ago | (#33450802)

it will be nice to not have choice limited to a locked-down "appliance".

Unless you can hold a button on bootup or install a package trivially that grants you access, you're still dealing with a "locked down appliance." Just because you -can- root it doesn't mean that they want you to.

MUCH better article, with pics and detailed specs (5, Informative)

blind biker (1066130) | more than 4 years ago | (#33449226)

Linky. [infosyncworld.com]

Re:MUCH better article, with pics and detailed spe (4, Interesting)

L4t3r4lu5 (1216702) | more than 4 years ago | (#33449760)

That story states that it has a 1024x600 screen, yet 1080p HD video playback. It has no video output port, according to the description.

False advertising or bad fact checking when writing the description?

Re:MUCH better article, with pics and detailed spe (1)

bemymonkey (1244086) | more than 4 years ago | (#33449902)

Obviously the screen isn't magically going to mutate into a 1080p monster when you play back 1080p material, but just being able to watch that material without needing to reencode it first is already a massive bonus.

Remember life before Rockplayer? Even DivX/XviD had to be reencoded so that you could watch it on Android...

Re:MUCH better article, with pics and detailed spe (1)

bsdaemonaut (1482047) | more than 4 years ago | (#33450472)

Most likely its downscaling, it says Full HD (1080p) Video Player.. so it seems to be technically referring to the software's ability to play 1080p, not the LCD screen. Pretty misleading.

Re:MUCH better article, with pics and detailed spe (2, Insightful)

L4t3r4lu5 (1216702) | more than 4 years ago | (#33450714)

I wouldn't mind if they'd said full 720p on a 600-line screen, but it's 1080p. That's almost double the resolution the screen is physically capable of.

That's some serious stat-padding.

Re:MUCH better article, with pics and detailed spe (2, Funny)

BeardedChimp (1416531) | more than 4 years ago | (#33451342)

Its 600 lines PER EYE. Since most people have two eyes I think we can all agree that 1200>1080.

Re:MUCH better article, with pics and detailed spe (1)

Shikaku (1129753) | more than 4 years ago | (#33450594)

No, it's called bad reading comprehension. It just downscales it to the screen.

Re:MUCH better article, with pics and detailed spe (1)

orateam (861461) | more than 4 years ago | (#33450648)

All Galaxy S phones so far have DLNA built in. So HD video output is now wireless.

Re:MUCH better article, with pics and detailed spe (1)

Crudely_Indecent (739699) | more than 4 years ago | (#33451012)

Galaxy S phones can connect to a TV using an HDMI [samsung.com] or composite [samsung.com] adapter.

Is it out of the realm of possibility for the tablet to have the same connection options?

Re:MUCH better article, with pics and detailed spe (0)

LingNoi (1066278) | more than 4 years ago | (#33451158)

What's so difficult to grasp? It plays back HD video. It never says it displays that video in HD.

False advertising or bad fact checking when writing the description?

Neither, you simply can't read.

Re:MUCH better article, with pics and detailed spe (1)

MozeeToby (1163751) | more than 4 years ago | (#33449762)

Exactly what kind of connector do they have plugged into the bottom of that thing? I thought we had gotten past this... my last 3 phones have all had charging and data connectivity of USB. Please don't tell me that a flagship product (other than Apple of course) is going away from industry standards yet again.

crn.com link fail (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 4 years ago | (#33449230)

Why bother? They link to a guardian article from whence all the real information comes [guardian.co.uk] anyway. No pricing, no hardware specs, really no useful information beyond a commitment to Android.

But ... does it run Linux!? (1, Informative)

udippel (562132) | more than 4 years ago | (#33449256)

No, seriously, I mean it. I don't want to be locked in, in some app-shop.
Should it run Ubuntu's Maverick, I'll go for one, sure.
Should it be a locked-up version, I'll skip it.

Maybe we should try a poll, so that Samsung can still liberate the hardware?

Re:But ... does it run Linux!? (3, Informative)

EvilRyry (1025309) | more than 4 years ago | (#33449444)

You might not have heard if you have been living under a rock for the past 2 or 3 years, but Android uses the Linux kernel. Whether you can run your _own_ Linux distribution on there is another question entirely. Sooner or later, I'm sure someone will crack it if Samsung has decided to lock it down. As with most (all?) Android devices, you're not forced to use the market.

Re:But ... does it run Linux!? (2, Informative)

tepples (727027) | more than 4 years ago | (#33449738)

As with most (all?) Android devices, you're not forced to use the market.

"Most" is correct. AT&T-branded Android devices don't have the option to install APKs from "Unknown sources".

Re:But ... does it run Linux!? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33450082)

Android devices sold by AT&T can usually be bought elsewhere without this restriction. The restriction is not on the device, it is on the carrier.

Re:But ... does it run Linux!? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33450652)

Actually, I have a Galaxy S smartphone and right on Samsung's site are directions on how to sideload APKs. You have to download the SDK and use a PC, but it's doable.
Personally, I haven't yet found the need to do so, but it's nice to know the option is there.

The tab looks to me like a Kindle/Nook competitor as much as an iPad competitor. I can tell you one thing, if it uses the same screen technology as the phone, the display is quite visible in bright sunlight. I was pleasantly surprised to be able to read my phone's screen outside in sunlight with sunglasses on.

Re:But ... does it run Linux!? (1)

stoolpigeon (454276) | more than 4 years ago | (#33451622)

I don't think you need the SDK - just connect to a pc with usb, and copy the file over and then install on the phone with a file browser. I find it easier to install with the sdk as I can do it from a shell, but most people would probably be more comfortable taking the other route.

Re:But ... does it run Linux!? (1)

ByOhTek (1181381) | more than 4 years ago | (#33449626)

Ummm...

There's a free app called 'App Installer' in the android marketplace. This lets you install any non-marketplace app.

If you want a less easy-route, you can download the dev kit and install any app you desire, using that. No need to touch the marketplace.

So, no, you are locked into some app-shop.

Re:But ... does it run Linux!? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33449670)

No, seriously, I mean it. I don't want to be locked in, in some app-shop.

If you really are serious, then I'm sure you know that Android does not keep you from installing other app-shops or non-app-shop apps? You just have to check a box in the settings.

Yes, I know, certain network operators block this. You should not buy from them. Don't settle for a crippled Android.

Is that a non-standard connector? (1)

Qubit (100461) | more than 4 years ago | (#33449318)

Take a look at the images here [ifanr.com] and tell me that's not some kind of proprietary, non-standard connector.

The most notes I could find on it were:

"Connectivity
30 pin connector"

What the fsck, Samsung? Why couldn't you just have used the industry standard microUSB plug?

Ugghhh...

Re:Is that a non-standard connector? (1)

nate_in_ME (1281156) | more than 4 years ago | (#33449450)

Ummm, maybe because they're looking for more to connect to it than just a computer/charger?

Re:Is that a non-standard connector? (1)

atamido (1020905) | more than 4 years ago | (#33450126)

So why not also have a connector that does [other stuff]? I don't see why having two connectors is a bad thing. One could be the standard micro-USB connector that is used 99% of the time by 99% of the people for syncing and charging. And then another one could whatever wacky proprietary design they use for those features only a tiny percentage of the population ever uses.

Re:Is that a non-standard connector? (1)

EvilRyry (1025309) | more than 4 years ago | (#33449480)

My thoughts exactly. Just when I thought we were getting somewhere on standardizing small devices on micro USB, Samsung teases us with an awesome device with this crazy crap on it.

Re:Is that a non-standard connector? (1)

Josh04 (1596071) | more than 4 years ago | (#33449542)

That is a standard. It's designed to replace Apple's iPod connector, which is arguably more flexible than USB.

Re:Is that a non-standard connector? (1)

atamido (1020905) | more than 4 years ago | (#33450146)

That is a standard. It's designed to replace Apple's iPod connector, which is arguably more flexible than USB.

And what standard is it? Do you have an ISO number? Or even a name?

Re:Is that a non-standard connector? (0)

Yvan256 (722131) | more than 4 years ago | (#33450304)

DTRAICWIAMFTUSB-0584

Re:Is that a non-standard connector? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33451020)

Gesundheit.

Re:Is that a non-standard connector? (1)

trickyD1ck (1313117) | more than 4 years ago | (#33451400)

De-facto standard, maybe?

Re:Is that a non-standard connector? (1)

atamido (1020905) | more than 4 years ago | (#33451548)

De-facto standard, maybe?

That's a good name for a proprietary connector on an unreleased tablet costing more and having less features than the currently leading tablet.

I would also like to nominate "Super Mighty Elephant Connector" for a name.

Re:Is that a non-standard connector? (1)

Altus (1034) | more than 4 years ago | (#33450462)

are you sure its not actually Apples iPod connector? it looks extremely similar.

I cant imagine Apple licensing that out for other devices, though it would be nice if the majority of mobile devices worked with the huge number of iPod/iPhone/iPad peripherals there are on the market.

Re:Is that a non-standard connector? (1)

thrakkattack (1646531) | more than 4 years ago | (#33449588)

It can be used for HDMI and docking as well.

Re:Is that a non-standard connector? (1)

atamido (1020905) | more than 4 years ago | (#33450326)

It can be used for HDMI and docking as well.

So why not use a mini-HDMI port (standard) and a mini-USB port (standard) next to each other? How is it more useful to require some proprietary cable that no one is going to have while your out and about?

Re:Is that a non-standard connector? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33450750)

More ports = more equipment
more equipment = more space + more cost + (more energy usage and or more heat)
Therefore one non-standard port means a cheaper, smaller, more efficient device device than 2 standard ports.

QED.

You can have any 3: Small size, Long batery life, general purpose functiopnality, full standars compliance, reasonable price.

Re:Is that a non-standard connector? (1)

samjam (256347) | more than 4 years ago | (#33451050)

except that it's going to make me not buy it for that reason along; smaller, cheaper, efficient means nothing unless it's still useful enough to buy

Re:Is that a non-standard connector? (2, Informative)

Taagehornet (984739) | more than 4 years ago | (#33450688)

[...] tell me that's not some kind of proprietary, non-standard connector

I would expect this to be the standard 30-pin PDMI connector [wikipedia.org] also found on the Dell Streak.

Samsung Android support sucks (0, Flamebait)

Frizzon (1594395) | more than 4 years ago | (#33449370)

I'm disgusted with Samsung Android support having been on the phone with them three times today! I have a Samsung Galaxy S Android phone, it's pretty new having been released in July, but it has Android 2.1 on it. My company runs exchange on non-standard TCP ports, so I need to be able to specify the port when connecting exchange. This is not possible in Android 2.1. There is a public patch for 2.2 to allow this - but Samsung have not released 2.2 for their phone. While web rumours say "September" - none of their support team were able to tell me when, or make a beta or any sort of patch which would solve the base problem (lack of proper MS Exchange support!) in their product. We are buying 8 new smartphones for new hires - looks like we'll have to use iPhones (which we recently moved away from because of battery issues). Samsung can't even move their leading smartphone to the 2.2 platform - god help anyone trying to get support on this pad... JK

Re:Samsung Android support sucks (1)

mu51c10rd (187182) | more than 4 years ago | (#33449506)

This is a common problem of Samsung's. Their update process is VERY slow. Ask Moment owners (like myself) how long it took them to release 2.1 to those of us running 1.6. Not sure why it takes them so long to update...but it does. Regardless, why switch to iPhones when you can switch to HTC (EVO) or Motorola (Droid)?

Re:Samsung Android support sucks (1)

ByOhTek (1181381) | more than 4 years ago | (#33449696)

Second the HTC/Motorola comment.

Particularly the Droid. If I weren't such a cheap bastard, I would have gotten that instead of the Moment.

Re:Samsung Android support sucks (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33450696)

Hate to burst your bubble, but Motorola has the same issues as Samsung for release time on their updates. I'm using a Droid and I'm still stuck on 2.1 because they haven't released the 2.2 update yet, even though 2.2 has been available for months. The update time from carriers on these software packages are ridiculous. By the time I get to use the software it is completely obsolete and Google will have its next version ready to go.

Re:Samsung Android support sucks (1)

rickb928 (945187) | more than 4 years ago | (#33451552)

Ditto for HTC. The MT3G waited for a while for updates, G1 of course is EOL and won't get anything official past 1.6 due to memory constraints, and any number of HTC boxen are just waiting for promised updates.

Expecting a lot of work on phones that are either no longer sold or are well past their most popular moment is pretty useless. Buying an Android phone with the expectation that it will be upgraded promptly is also unwise - if you think buying a Ford on the premise that it will get some massive 'magic' upgrades without cost makes sens, then you're not in my reality.

ps- The Exchange on non-standard ports problem plagues many platforms and clients. If you know this, you can't buy a phone to access your corporate mail without checking this FIRST. Do I need to repeat this louder and slower?

Re:Samsung Android support sucks (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33449590)

That is not their support departments fault that you are impatient. Of course they will not tell you a date, because corporate do not want you to know yet. When it is made public to support then it is made public to, you know, the public.

Re:Samsung Android support sucks (1)

N1AK (864906) | more than 4 years ago | (#33449740)

You bought a phone that didn't support the thing you needed to use it for. You're moaning that it doesn't do something you knew it wouldn't. How seriously did Ford take you when you complained that your car still doesn't hover or fly?

Perhaps you can complain to apple that they won't upgrade your iPhones to iOS 5 when you get them.

Re:Samsung Android support sucks (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33449960)

Android 2.2 has been out since June. Samsung have said that they'll be shipping it soon. Your analogies fail, utterly.

Re:Samsung Android support sucks (1, Interesting)

alen (225700) | more than 4 years ago | (#33450006)

you don't understand

he told his boss how much iphone sucks because it's closed and android is open and now he has egg on his face because the new cool phone doesn't work with his infrastructure. while the closed iphone does.

Re:Samsung Android support sucks (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33450378)

you don't understand

he told his boss how much iphone sucks because it's closed and android is open and now he has egg on his face because the new cool phone doesn't work with his infrastructure. while the closed iphone does.

Egg-zactly!!!

Re:Samsung Android support sucks (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33450354)

It took Sprint and HTC over 9 months of "We're working on it, it'll be out soon" to bring 2.1 to the HTC Hero. Let me know how you're doing in 7 more months.

Re:Samsung Android support sucks (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33450540)

"We are buying 8 new smartphones for new hires - looks like we'll have to use iPhones"

Yeah, because there are absolutely no companies offering much better Android 2.2 phones than any Samsungs offering -.- (HTC, Motorola, Sony Ericsson)

Samsung's first Android phone? (2, Informative)

mu51c10rd (187182) | more than 4 years ago | (#33449436)

which include the first Android device from Samsung, the Galaxy S.

My Samsung Moment and the Intercept would beg to differ. The writer didn't do much research on Samsung's product offerings.

Re:Samsung's first Android phone? (1)

DriedClexler (814907) | more than 4 years ago | (#33450886)

Samsung Moment user here too. Hardware keyboards FTW.

Still, I shudder when I read stuff like this: "This is not just another tablet. We call it a Smart Media device," Thomas Richter, Samsung's head of product portfolio, told an IFA press conference

*sigh* ... If you have a good product, why the insistence on marketingspeak. Then again, Apple insists on dropping the definite article for the iPhone, er, I mean, for iPhone.

How much "tainted" wrt other Android devices? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33449534)

Some Samsung android phones are famous for their closed source addons by Samsung, is this also the case? What level of incompatibility, if any, could we expect from a developer point of view?

1080p on a 1024x600 screen ??? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33449544)

After looking over the specs, I was impressed that it offered 1080p. Looking over them a second time, I noticed the screen resolution is only 1024x600. Why claim to support 1080p if you can't display it without scaling it down to a lesser resolution?

Re:1080p on a 1024x600 screen ??? (2, Informative)

Brian Feldman (350) | more than 4 years ago | (#33449658)

1080p support on most electronics actually refers to "output" and not selfsame screen resolution

Transcoding; HDMI output (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 4 years ago | (#33449822)

Why claim to support 1080p if you can't display it without scaling it down to a lesser resolution?

Because you already have 1080p videos on your PC or camcorder and don't want to spend a lot of time transcoding them to "retina display" size before putting them on your phone. Or because you can buy an HDMI dock and connect its output to your 1080p LCD HDTV.

Re:1080p on a 1024x600 screen ??? (1)

DrXym (126579) | more than 4 years ago | (#33450140)

I expect Samsung's tech specs will weasel out of this by saying their device is capable of displaying a 1080p signal, not necessarily displaying a 1080p native resolution. It would be sweet if it could of course, but on a 7" perhaps it's asking too much.

Flash SUCKS on it (and other droids) (2, Interesting)

wisebabo (638845) | more than 4 years ago | (#33449596)

A couple of reviews of Flash running on Android 2.2 have come out. I submitted this story awhile ago to the editors but for some reason (anti-Apple bias?) they chose not to run it.

"shockingly bad" http://newteevee.com/2010/08/31/video-flash-on-android-is-startlingly-bad/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+OmMalik+(GigaOM) [newteevee.com]

"Weak Android player proves Steve Jobs right": http://blog.laptopmag.com/mobile-flash-fail-weak-android-player-proves-jobs-right [laptopmag.com]

From the reviews:

"Adobe needs to have a better answer to whether or not Flash is still relevant in a world where other technologies have rapidly started displacing it. Based on my early experience with Flash Player 10.1 for mobile, it could soon join the floppy drive in the tech graveyard, something else Steve Jobs helped kill."

and

"While in theory Flash video might be a competitive advantage for Android users, in practice it’s difficult to imagine anyone actually trying to watch non-optimized web video on an Android handset, all of which makes one believe that maybe Steve Jobs was right to eschew Flash in lieu of HTML5 on the iPhone and iPad."

So is it better to have a sucky experience or none at all?

Re:Flash SUCKS on it (and other droids) (3, Insightful)

MemoryDragon (544441) | more than 4 years ago | (#33449724)

Sorry but I have a firsthand experience, Flash runs pretty well on my nexus one, you turn it on selectively and flash video plays fine and thats all I need it for.

Re:Flash SUCKS on it (and other droids) (2, Insightful)

Nerdfest (867930) | more than 4 years ago | (#33449758)

So is it better to have a sucky experience or none at all?

It is best to be able to make the choice yourself.

Re:Flash SUCKS on it (and other droids) (1)

teg (97890) | more than 4 years ago | (#33450330)

(about flash on mobile devices)It is best to be able to make the choice yourself.

In principle, I agree with you. That said, there is a benefit to a ban on a major device. The benefit is that the world adapts - video is made available in HTML5 format, to give one example. If everyone had the option, the web sites would just say "turn it on".

And if there is one think I dislike more than not having flash on iPhone, it would be having it. Other than youtube and its ilk, which are moving to HTML5 because of the flash ban, my flash experience is that it makes the web a worse place. Large, annoying, animated ads. And little else.

Re:Flash SUCKS on it (and other droids) (1)

Altus (1034) | more than 4 years ago | (#33450548)

When, in 5 years, the only video and game platform available on the web is still this shitty ass flash crap you can get back to me about how much choice you have.

Re:Flash SUCKS on it (and other droids) (1)

MozeeToby (1163751) | more than 4 years ago | (#33450672)

Ah, so choice is only good when it's your choice. Got it.

There's already alternatives to flash on the web, if Flash sucks that badly compared to the competition ("shitty ass flash" as you put it) only foolish companies would continue using it. All the alternatives should be supported so that the web designers can make the decision based on what technology meets the requirements, keeps costs down, and makes their customers happy. You know, as opposed to this idea that HTML 5 is going to be the ultra-hammer that magically turns every problem into a nail.

Vector animation (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 4 years ago | (#33449862)

So is it better to have a sucky experience

That depends. Does Homestar Runner play in HTML5? Does Weebl and Bob? Do the animations on Albino Blacksheep, JibJab, or Newgrounds? These are vector animations, which would be ten times bigger if transcoded to VP8 or H.264. Perhaps we can see more use of HTML5 should Synfig or KToon become more popular, but right now, animators know Adobe Flash.

Re:Vector animation (1)

LingNoi (1066278) | more than 4 years ago | (#33451492)

That depends. Does Homestar Runner play in HTML5?

Yes, yes it does [smokescreen.us] .

Re:Vector animation (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 4 years ago | (#33451650)

Then why can't the browsers on iPhone and Android just use Smokescreen?

What Google needs to do next (5, Interesting)

MikeRT (947531) | more than 4 years ago | (#33449654)

Create an open source ebook system and expand the Android marketplace to make it dead simple for authors to skip the middle man and sell directly to Android users.

Re:What Google needs to do next (1)

DriedClexler (814907) | more than 4 years ago | (#33451022)

... which would also make it easy for users to get the ebooks for free, making it impossible for authors to make money this way.

Aldiko (1)

jDeepbeep (913892) | more than 4 years ago | (#33451612)

Apparently, the way to go for money-making, currently, is to provide Aldiko with your material in epub format, and they build a sort-of statically-linked app for each book. Of course they'd still have to leverage the License Server. (And please, correct me if I'm wrong. I'm not completely clear on the details, especially considering that the licensing server was cracked already.)

The tablet is sweet (2, Interesting)

MemoryDragon (544441) | more than 4 years ago | (#33449702)

the price is not, it is 700 Euros which is more expensive than the iPad 9 inch version and it only has seven inches screensize.
I just wonder how many of those Samsung wants to sell here with their pay more get less politics...

Re:The tablet is sweet (1)

AHuxley (892839) | more than 4 years ago | (#33449828)

Yes the price makes the Dell Streak and Apple ipad seem $ 'normal'.

Re:The tablet is sweet (1)

Mechanist.tm (1124543) | more than 4 years ago | (#33450838)

Where are you getting this price from. They havent released it yet?

Re:The tablet is sweet (1)

Zaiff Urgulbunger (591514) | more than 4 years ago | (#33451524)

If that really is the price, they'll have a tough time competing with anything... I mean, the iPad is not badly priced for an Apple device, and the iPod Touch, whilst obviously being smaller and not having 3G, is still considerably cheaper.

Also, Archos have a few new Android devices out soon [reghardware.com] , one of which is sub-£100 (£99.99 I think!), which is probably more on a par with the iPod Touch (not the new 4th-Gen model, but the previous ones) in terms of spec, so not as good as the Galaxy Tab, but it's *FAR* cheaper.

The main down-side is that I _believe_ that Google only allow access to the Android App-store for phone type devices, so the Galaxy Tab would qualify where the Archos does not. I might be wrong about this though!!

I'm buying one and am looking forward to Flash (1)

awjr (1248008) | more than 4 years ago | (#33449816)

This is the first device I have seen where I've gone, wow, this has real business potential.

We can port our Flex (Flash) based applications to this using Air or through the web (with the settings set in the browser to only run plugins on demand). The resolution is also very good.

I'm quite excited by this.

Really? (0, Troll)

bgspence (155914) | more than 4 years ago | (#33449838)

To quote from:
http://www.infosyncworld.com/reviews/internet-tablets/samsung-galaxy-tab/11309.html [infosyncworld.com]

"In design, its light build provides portability, with its svelte dimensions making it easy to grip and use."

If they can't even design a press release, how do they expect to create a tablet with as much attention to detail as Apple does with the iPad.

Lots of tech specs on the hardware, but probably a big fail on the software environment.

But, I might consider it if it came with wheels so I could 'Skate and Surf".

Re:Really? (1)

LingNoi (1066278) | more than 4 years ago | (#33451572)

So you're poo pooing the whole product based on a news website's spelling mistake. Seriously dude, just come out and say "I'm an apple fan and think this thing sucks". You would at least make more sense then all the nonsense you posted.

Samsung Android = $ going to Microsoft (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33449850)

If you buy Samsung you are supporting Microsoft, its spurious claims that Linux infringes on MS patents, and Microsoft taxes. And supporting patent trolling in general.

Samsung, like HTC, bent over and spread with nary a protest when MS lawyers came knocking: http://techrights.org/wiki/index.php/Samsung

moOd down (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33449876)

brilliant plan Are a pathetic look at your soft, end, we need you But with Netcraft continues toChew Than make a sincere Are tied up in Standards should Uncover a story of keed to be Kreskin you have a play Please moderate Theo de RRadt, one committerbase and same year, BSD that the project join in. It can be posts on Usenet are to survive at all Kreskin culture of abuse everyday...Redefine represents the baby...don't fear towel under the includes where you Fun to be again. Raymond in his developers

7" seems like the wrong compromise. (2, Interesting)

guidryp (702488) | more than 4 years ago | (#33450670)

7" is too big. It isn't really portable as in throwing it in your pocket or using a belt clip.
7" is too small. It really won't hold a full page PDF/Comic.

If I was on the go I would prefer pocketable 5" (Dell streak size).

For at home or a transportable (requiring a bag) I would actually prefer 10+ and about 1200x800 resolution for looking full screen at PDFs/Comics.

An attempt to fill both niches meets none of them very well.

Android is the future! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33451010)

> Samsung is making no bones about it: Google Android is its future

So much the future, that they've gone to the trouble of developing their own mobile platform, Bada: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bada_(operating_system) [wikipedia.org] . If that's what a corporation does when Android is their future, I'd be intrigued to know what they do when it isn't!

"Android Allegiance" (1, Funny)

RevWaldo (1186281) | more than 4 years ago | (#33451500)

I, for one, welcome our new...ah, skip it.

.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?