What the iPad 3 Looks Like 471
redletterdave writes "If you were expecting a radically different-looking tablet from the iPad 2, prepare for a minor letdown. In the same way Apple upgraded the iPhone 4 into the iPhone 4S, the exterior of the iPad 3 mirrors that of the iPad 2, despite completely renovated and upgraded innards. iLab Factory reportedly provided Sharp with the necessary parts to build the high-resolution iPad 3 display, and in a company blog post, various iPad 3 components are displayed alongside those of the iPad 2 for quick comparison. In addition to a new camera mount that will reportedly match or improve upon the 8-megapixel camera system in the iPhone 4S, the post also revealed that the iPad 3 will be approximately 1 mm thicker than its predecessor to house Apple's upgraded components, including a bigger battery, an improved camera, and a dual-LED lit system to make the 2048 x 1536 display even brighter."
It's new and it's Apple (Score:5, Funny)
Even though I have no need for it, I feel a strange compulsion to throw money at it.
Re:It's new and it's Apple (Score:5, Funny)
Re:It's new and it's Apple (Score:5, Funny)
Don't practice the politics of envy and class warfare. If you aren't successful enough to be an Apple man that's no ones fault but your own.
Re:It's new and it's Apple (Score:5, Funny)
This is for you: http://theoatmeal.com/comics/apple [theoatmeal.com]
why do we care about shape? (Score:5, Insightful)
Why have we grown so accustomed to the style changing radically every new release? Not just apple, but any phone, or gadget, or car... Why do we feel this need to see a new fancy box?
Seems like once we arrive at the thinnest tablets, it will be the ultimate "form follows function": a flat panel. Will we then no longer expect a radical new shape? (circular tablets?)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Will we then no longer expect a radical new shape? (circular tablets?)
Wouldn't that be a radial new shape?
Re: (Score:2)
+1 /snort/ ;-)
Re: (Score:2)
I care about the shape of the phone more than the pad, partly because I don't have a pad but also because these devices need to evolve into something more fit to hold in our hands.
Obviously there is some minimum screen size that people will want for a given device. So once that area is defined, and hardware can be crammed into some very thin space behind it, designers should be free to shape the rest of a device's case in some hand(s) friendly way.
I've seen some anecdotal data suggesting that iphones and ot
Re:why do we care about shape? (Score:4, Insightful)
Two Words: Social Status
In an increasingly narcissitic society, we look to the gadgets we wield to say something about our social status. The consumer wet dream is that the brand is distinct (I own an Apple, I own a Razr, etc), but that each new version is distinguishable from the previous version so that I can flaunt that "I have the 4S while you only have the 4."
Thus the proof that Apple is not about status (Score:5, Funny)
In an increasingly narcissitic society, we look to the gadgets we wield to say something about our social status.
Perhaps you do. Apple users just want something that works. That's why Apple doesn't need to change designs between cycles and people still buy them anyway- because they are actually useful and people buy them for that more than for something they display for looks only.
What you say is true of cars and clothes, to give people some reason they might want a new car or new clothes.
Re:Thus the proof that Apple is not about status (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
Tech Media needs a JPG (Score:3)
Essentially looks the same? (Score:5, Funny)
The biggest question.... (Score:5, Interesting)
Will it be 4G or 3G?
3G = who cares.
4G = needs a nuclear reactor for 5 hours of battery life.
There is no clear win.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Actually for a tablet it won't make all that huge of a difference. On a tablet the primary power consumer is the screen, not the electronics; the electronics are almost an afterthought compared to trying to light up a 9.7" screen. This is the inverse of phones where the electronics are the primary consumer and the screen is the secondary consumer (although it's not lopsided like it is on tablets).
So Apple could easily throw in a 40nm LTE radio with only a small impact to battery life (~1H). However it's App
Re: (Score:3)
3G/4G - meh, who cares.
High resolution screen - wow.
If it actually has that screen then everything else could be identical to an iPad 2 and it would be a hit.
All these leaks... (Score:3, Interesting)
Apple is carefully leaking information to dilute the new tablets that are going to be presented in the Mobile World Congress 2012 just in a few days. Samsung is rumored to present there a tablet with high resolution like the iPad3 and Apple might not catch up in time, and it seems that they are leaking this and announcing a bit afterwards...
Ok, but why buy it (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
Because 3 > 2. Get with the program!
Re: (Score:2)
By designing a device that (at least for me) is just about media consumption, the only way I can be driven to upgrade is by some form of media coming out that my ipad cant handle.
Like, say, HD video, which is explicitly mentioned in TFA?
Re: (Score:3)
Useless. For a screen size so small, HD doesn't really mean much. For static images, like reading higher definition documents, like manuals in PDF form, it IS a bonus. It's also nicer for map applications, as the screen will be sharper and be able to carry more detail.
For video, upping the resolution is just whipping it out to measure, because when it comes to motion video, sometimes more resolution is just more resolution.
Re: (Score:2)
It sounds very much like you bought the iPad because it was first, rather than because it was the iPad (which is perfectly reasonable).
If all you're really doing in media consumption, then the upgrades will mean little to nothing to you; you'd also be further ahead to buy a different tablet if you were in the market right now.
The iPad's strength is in all of the other stuff it can do, and everyone I know that owns one (myself included of course) will be buying the 3 if the display is better and the speed bu
Re:Ok, but why buy it (Score:4, Interesting)
So aside from the fact that you're trolling extremely poorly:
An iPad/year is a cost of $1.50 a day, you want to talk about expensive "status symbols" (seriously, if you think the iPad is a status symbol get a life) look no further than gourmet coffee.
Now since I actually do things for a living, my iPad is both paid for by my company and even if it wasn't a buck fifty a day to keep something I use several hours a day up to date is a fantastic deal... I use my car less than that and it costs a hell of a lot more.
Re: (Score:2)
The iPad 1 isn't likely to be able to run iOS 6, judging by how badly iOS 5 cut in to its usable (for apps) RAM, so if you want any future OS features and/or newer software that requires them, you'll need a newer machine.
App makers will likely abandon the iPad 1 as soon as they have a decent excuse, due to the aforementioned RAM limitations, so third party software will stop getting updates and newer apps won't work at all.
Not trying to convince you or saying those are sufficient reasons to shell out $500,
Re: (Score:3)
A double-resolution screen doesn't meet that requirement?
Re:Ok, but why buy it (Score:5, Insightful)
Apple (and car manufacturers) are going to continue to release new models year after year. Some people are going to immediately get the newest thing (much more so with a relatively inexpensive tablet), but a large member of the user group is going to stick with what they have because it is already working fine for them.
Our tendency is to mistakenly think that this works against Apple. Yes, I'm sure that Apple would love it if everyone who had an iPad 1 or 2 threw it away and bought a 3. However, read your own words - you're saying that you bought version 1 of a device and it is still working out great for you around the time that version 3 comes out. Sounds like you are pretty happy with your purchase. Companies like Apple should be happy about that. It works against them if owners of previous models feel burned when the new version comes out.
Judging from the article's speculations about the iPad 3 (who knows how accurate they are), these are fairly incremental improvements - better battery, better screen resolution, etc. This is similar to what I'd expect with a new car model from year to year.
Only a small segment of the market is going to rush out and buy the latest and greatest. Companies like Apple can succeed by recognizing that and growing a set of repeat buyers out of the remaining field. The fact that consumers aren't feeling burned when new models come out, and feel that old models work fine, makes those consumers more likely to repeat a purchase.
These "exclusive" sites have a poor track record (Score:5, Insightful)
Of actually knowing (or predicting) what and when the notoriously secretive Apple will release its next product. Swallow any claims not coming from 1 Infinite Loop with a Large Dose of skepticism.
It's the accessories market, stupid. (Score:5, Insightful)
I didn't read TFA, but... (Score:4, Informative)
I'm guessing the iPad 3 looks kind of like a rectangle with rounded corners and a screen on one face?
Re: (Score:3)
I'm guessing the iPad 3 looks kind of like a rectangle with rounded corners and a screen on one face?
Along with, I guess, 25 other distinguishing features that people conveniently forget to mention every time they beat this dead horse.
Re: (Score:3)
Mainly because they are not very distinguishing, and are in fact things that many other similar products had before Apple came along. Take a look at a Samsung digital photo frame [androidauthority.com] from a few years before the iPad and you will notice that it looks exactly the same. Clean, uncluttered, black, thin, no face buttons, silver edging with a thin border, screen in the centre, light weight, hidden ports and devices, logo centred...
People laugh at Apple's design claims because they are laughable.
what is the point of constant changing? (Score:2)
Windows 95 made some huge GUI advances but ever since then when a new version of Windows comes out everyone seems to want it to look different.
same with ipad and iphone. it's like people want a new design every year. if the current one works aesthetically and technically what's the point?
RESOLUTION!!! (Score:3)
2048 x 1536 display even brighter
Now, when can I get this resolution on a mainstream laptop (or atleast on one that costs less than $1200-1300
I'll be honest. (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Very quick to post. But than you *ARE* a paid shill, so you've got canned content all lined up.
Re:Cheaper iPad 2 (Score:4, Insightful)
Normally I don't pay much heed to comments like this, but that shit was so canned it still has the ring marks. Cranberry anyone?
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
He (and bonch, and a few others) are either shills or fanboys who are waaay too invested.
Re:Cheaper iPad 2 (Score:5, Funny)
Fanboys. Anti-fanboys. Two sides of the same irrational coin if you ask me.
Re: (Score:3)
Wouldn't it be hard to make exact change with an irrational coin?
Just my sqrt(2) cents.
I suppose you could use it to buy some pi.
Re:Cheaper iPad 2 (Score:4, Insightful)
Okay, you people are retarded. What jabs at Google? And of course it quickly went to +5 (or whatever it's rated now), it was the first post that moderators saw.
Normally, I don't respond to comments like this, but the goofy paranoia on Slashdot whenever anyone dares to--gasp--say positive things about a really popular tech gadget is really nutty.
Re: (Score:3)
I'm still wondering why it's 'flamebait" now. It's relevant to the article, it articulates what he or she likes or dislikes about the topic at hand. The bit about market share is not really relevant, but hardly flamebait. It is what it is.
I used to come to slashdot for tech news, but the nerd rage her is becoming too much of a turn off.
I'll tell you why (Score:5, Funny)
I'll tell you why. Because troll moderators have taken over the site and are trying to subvert it. Because the IT readership that used to visit Slashdot has been bleeding from the site in the last few years, leaving behind the more extremist posters. Because if you say something that those posters don't like, they abuse the moderation system to drive you off the site rather than reply and explain why you're wrong.
The latest thing is to accuse absolutely everyone of being a "shill" so that others will follow along and do their dirty work. My post didn't go down to -1 Flamebait until someone else accused me of being a shill and got modded +5 Insightful (!). Because of the default filters, +5 comments are automatically expanded while less than +2 is collapsed, so now every moderator reading the comments for the first time will see that post first and likely not even read what I wrote.
CmdrTaco promised a new moderation system for years, and it never arrived before he left the site. This limited moderation pool concept is terrible. It makes it so that a single point in either direction has a drastic effect on karma and effectively restricts people from posting something that's unpopular, even if it's legitimately true.
This is off-topic, and so I'd be justified in getting downmodded for this, but since my karma is getting completely destroyed right now anyway, I may as well post it before I'm limited to two posts a day. Thanks, Slashdot. Thanks, troll moderators.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
It's just amazing, though, how you and bonch manage to get such a nicely written, spelling and grammar checked, hyperlinked and structured post out so fast (read: exact same time stamp as publish of story) every single time there's a thread about Google and/or Apple.
A dedicated blogger - I could see top 5 posts on a regular basis.
But it defies the laws of probability that you guys are whipping this stuff up off the top of your head on every single thread and getting first post in, even before the inevitable
Re: (Score:3)
Shilling is bad but blind hating for free is preferred.
Re:Cheaper iPad 2 (Score:5, Interesting)
I seriously doubt they will shoot so low. At best I expect a price drop to $350 (but most likely $399) for the iPad 2 (and only available Wi-Fi 16 GB without cell data options.)
As for the PC market vs. Tablets... I got to ponder... Many people are defensive saying that tablets can't or should never take over and that PCs must live for us to keep our computing freedom... but what if we are looking at it wrong? What if we look at tablets not as downgraded computers but as the next evolutionary step for consoles and handheld entertainment units?
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Cheaper iPad 2 (Score:4, Insightful)
The true tablet market right now is composed of iPads, Kindle Fires and Nooks. All have similar lockins. Microsoft's ARM Win8 has already been stated will be similar. True Android Tables (non branched like the Nook or Kindle) are the exception but to be honest, they are not selling well relatively speaking.
People in this site have also vocally criticized those two tablets for the same points.
That's why I don't single out Apple's iPad.
Re:I expect the iPad2 to lose at most $50 per tier (Score:4, Insightful)
To be fair, Apple has slashed the price of iPhones by $100 every time they retain a previous generation in the market. That is why I say $399. It's not blind faith or a gut feeling. It's just being based off Apple year to year habits.
Besides, a $100 reduction may be enough to bring the iPad2 into "budget" range. At the same time it's not so much that anyone that bought an iPad2 a month earlier would be annoyed at the insanely lower price.
Slash the price to $200 and even the most rabid Apple fan will knock at Apple's door with torches and pitchforks if they bought a full price iPad 2 one month earlier.
Re: (Score:2)
The next few years are going to be really fun to watch as companies fight over this new market.
Not how I'd put it.
No, IPad 2 will be discontinued. (Score:3)
the most interesting rumor is that the iPad 2 will continue to be sold at $200 to compete with the Kindle Fire. While the iPad is still the most dominant tablet, the Kindle Fire had a decent run over the holidays.
You should stop thinking rumor somehow equals reality. $200 is less than the iPad2 costs to build.
iPad 2 will drop $100, and continue until stocks run out, then it will be officially discontinued. Exactly the same thing that happened with iPad 1.
Re:Cheaper iPad 2 (Score:4, Insightful)
The metamods rated your post interesting. It really was though. Enjoyed it. But one thing in particular is wonderful but at the same time terrible all in one:
I had a Toshiba Thrive a while back. I've delivered a thorough critique on tablets in general before, but suffice it to say, for anything more than watching a simple movie or reading an e-book, they're terrible. Attempt to actually do anything or use it more than this, it just isn't comfortable, flexible, or featureful enough.
However:
Games. This is it for the consoles. After watching Dead Space and an MMO and Rainbow Six on iOS/Android, the writing is on the wall. I was amazed at playing this on a phone. Granted, a console offers a stable config for developers, a platform for better sales, etc. But when featureful games keep on being released, after a while one will ask themself why bother buying another unit. And it's kind of amazing to have quick aiming in FPS's after being so hampered by a controller (Call of Duty on consoles versus Modern Combat on iOS/Android).
And as a side note, as much as I refuse to ever purchase another Apple product (for a myriad of reasons they're an awful and evil company), the Android situation for games (not the rest--app fragmentation is only a problem games--nothing else) is terrible. iOS gives a stable environment for developers and its app store forces devs to release the full version for download. Gameloft won't let you run it's games on half of android devices, or won't carry them in store, and makes one download them directly thus negating any benefits of the Android Market (auto updates, re-downloading games, etc.). Do they even provide updates? It's a mess.
Though I am curious with the higher res screen how games will perform. Hell my 8800 GTS 512, while old, can't even handle games at that resolution. Though kudos for pushing the resolution forward. Two things are the biggest factors in how good a games graphics are--the texture detail and a higher resolution.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
...did you even read my post?
Re: (Score:3)
...did you even read my post?
And why would he want to do that? Just to be different?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
um yea
"the most interesting rumor is that the iPad 2 will continue to be sold at $200 to compete with the Kindle Fire."
continue? again show me where they are selling the iPad2 at 200$, it sure as shit aint on apple.com
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
The fundamental difference, as I see it, is that a 5 year old PC still works perfectly fine and can run most modern programs now-a-days just fine (so long as you've taken decent care of keeping crud off it). Good luck doing the same thing with the iPad: assuming it still even works 5 years from now, the battery life will have decayed to the point where it will be barely usable, and if you think you will have the newest version of the OS available on it, excuse me while I laugh my ass of at your naiveté.
You're comparing apples to oranges. Most 5-year-old PCs won't run Windows 7 very well, if at all, and have no chance at Windows 8. Most iOS software doesn't require the very latest version of iOS to run, so it should remain a very useful device. Heck, iPod Touch 1st generation and original iPhones can only run up to iOS 3.x and still sell pretty well on eBay. They are almost 5 years old.
As for battery, just get it replaced [apple.com] for $99 if you still value your device, but I think "barely usable" is an exagger
Re: (Score:3)
Erm, most 5 year old PCs will run Windows 7 just fine, unless you purchased one that was sub-par and already on its way out when you bought it. I have Windows 7 running on an old emachines I purchased for $550 back in 2006 for my child sister and the thing runs fine. No it wont play modern games but that was never even part of the equation when it was purchased with Windows XP.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
Unfortunately Microsoft is likely to make UEFI a requirement for Windows 8 machines. This means a 5 year old PC won't run Windows 8 at all.
You have got it totally backwards. The hardware is the one that enforces secure boot, not the software. So if you buy a Windows 8 x86/64 certified PC, you can't install other OSes without turning off secure boot.
But Windows 8 will boot without secure boot enabled or even supported by the system because it supports legacy BIOS.
It makes sense really, use the hardware if it exists, skip it if it doesn't. Don't know why it is so confusing to folks though.
Re:Cheaper iPad 2 (Score:4, Insightful)
assuming it still even works 5 years from now, the battery life will have decayed to the point where it will be barely usable
You mean like a laptop? And before you say something about, "You can work with the laptop plugged in!", remember you can do the exact same with a tablet.
and if you think you will have the newest version of the OS available on it, excuse me while I laugh my ass of at your naiveté.
And how is that different than the 90s, when desktop computing really started to take off?
a regular PC is just straight up better in so many ways.
Depends on your use cases.
Re:Cheaper iPad 2 (Score:5, Interesting)
Actually, my iPad 1 battery life is just fine. And it runs pretty much all the apps that my iPad 2 does. Same goes for my iPhone 2G - battery life is still good, and it still runs a surprisingly large number of apps, even at iOS 3.1.3.
Quite frankly, you should do some research before you speculate
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Cheaper iPad 2 (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Cheaper iPad 2 (Score:5, Funny)
You're missing the point. Tablets are popular in several niches, the biggest one (probably, pulling out of my netherregions but hold on for a sec) is the demographic that can't keep a PC, either Windows or OS X or whatever, running for 5 years if their lives depended on it. The concept of 'upgrading' anything is foreign. They just want their GBs and Angry Birds and whatnot. Thinking is not part of the experience.
Yes, the battery is going to go south in 5 years (2 years, 3 years) but buying a new Shiny every couple of years is what these folks are designed to do. It beats actually learning about the computer or car or TV or $InsertHiTechItemHere.
This is a totally different 'computing' paradigm. It's not the computer you grew up with. It's probably not something you're much interested in.
But YOU are not THEM. You're a rumor, recognizable only as deja vu and dismissed just as quickly. You don't exist; you were never even born. Anonymous is your name. C++ your native tongue. You're no longer part of the System. You're above the System. Over it. Beyond it. We're "them." We're "they."
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
First off, I am most assuredly not an Apple shill. I work for a company called DiSTI (www.disti.com). I would be happy if anyone at Apple even knew who the hell we are and what we do, let alone actually PAY me to post on slashdot.
But let me rebut your answer to the question: "Are they [tablets] more useful than a desktop or laptop?"
They most assuredly ARE more useful in a very large number of specific niche markets. Sure for _generic everyday use_ a laptop is better, but when your purpose is to make some
Re: (Score:3)
So, just because you refuse to even take the time to google for "ipad battery replacement" that means that it's not possible? Suuuure... [ifixit.com].
Apple is one of the only companies to have increased production over the past few years, Macs have steadily been gaining market share yet compared to the runaway success of the iPad, it Mac market share seems almost to be standing still & Apple now sells more iPads than they do Macs.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Not always, LCD screens are only just catching up to higher end CRT displays...
Re:2048 x 1536?! (Score:5, Insightful)
That was once true, but desktop and laptop screens have regressed over the past few years towards 1080p (high-def TV) resolutions. There are only a few 2560x1600 desktop displays now - Apple for example no longer sells one. 1600x1200 screens were available on laptops for some time, too, but no longer.
With that resolution and dual backlights, I bet the new iPad screen will look fantastic. Now give me a 'retinal' 30" display for my desktop, please.
Re: (Score:3)
Sure for your average consumer who is just consuming media it's fine. For someone doing software dev or similar it can be painful. At my last employer I found some reasonably priced Dell's (within the budget I
Re: (Score:3)
I have the same. It's OK, but still fewer pixels than the 15" 1600x1200 laptop I had, what, 8 years ago? 4 years ago it was 1400x1050 in a 14" screen, which was a great compromise between resolution and size for a laptop.
Re: (Score:3)
They haven't reached person's physical viewing limit yet. Although they are finally at least within an order of magnitude.
The iPhone4 boasts a resolution of just over 300dpi, which makes each pixel roughly 80 microns in size. This is still more than four times as large as what a healthy human eye is capable of resolving. Of course, even at 20 microns, it isn't really going to be sufficient, because to be completely undetectable it has to pass the Nyquist limit for our resolution, which means that the
about time (Score:3)
If it happens, its about fucking time they get a decent resolution on it.
Seriously ppi took a big step back when everything went from CRT to LCD.
Re: (Score:2)
You need a bigger desktop.
(I'm typing on my 4960x1600 desktop, so I'm safe for at least one more iTeration)
Re:2048 x 1536?! (Score:5, Informative)
YES PLEASE! Finally high res screens on consumer electronics! I hope the rumor that Apple's computers will get updated with high res screens is also true. Laptop manufacturers need a kick in the butt to get them out of the 1366x768 doldrums.
Re: (Score:3)
My 2+ year old, 15" Sager has 1920 x 1080.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
It works. People like it. Redesigns are expensive.
Maybe they'd change it to avoid getting sued by Samsung for copying the Samsung Digital Photo Frame design: http://www.letsgodigital.org/images/artikelen/47/samsung_digital_photo_frame.gif [letsgodigital.org]
Re: (Score:3)
Maybe they'd change it so that your head would spontaneously combust the moment you saw it. But oh well, not even Jobs was that good.
Re: (Score:2)
What changes would you make to it to make it better? Just curious. Personally, I think they hit the sweet spot with the first design, except for the obvious screen density limitations.
p.s. Does the iPad have
Re: (Score:2)
the black rim is painted under the glass
Re:Why would it be radically different? (Score:4, Insightful)
Yes, that's literally the only thing that separates the iPhone/iPad's design from everyone else's, the fact that it's a rounded rectangle with a flat surface and glossy paint. It's certainly not the radius of the corners, the 1-inch black border with chrome backing that peeks over just enough to frame it, the grid of icons, the thievery of artwork, the touchscreen gestures that originated with iOS, etc.
Tablets didn't start looking like the iPad until the iPad came out. That really should clue you into the idea that the design comes from Jonathan Ive's design studio and isn't some obvious thing that has been around forever. Of course it seems obvious now, because the iPad is so successful. There's a cognitive bias going on where the thing that succeeded now seems obvious in retrospect even though it didn't before it came into existence.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
http://www.pcwelt.de/galerien/iPad-Vorgaenger-1008126.html?bild=3 [pcwelt.de]
yes no one had glossy black tablets with 1 inch radius corners before iPad, not that 1992 compaq I linked to above
Fail, nothing like an iPad (Score:5, Informative)
That device (and I notice you had to look VERY hard pre-iPad to find something even sort of close) doesn't even have SYMMETRIC borders! They vary from 1-2".
Also it had all kinds of features along the front plate like speaker grills. Basically you were a mile away from anything like the iPad we have now.
Re: (Score:3)
I didnt look very hard, literally 1 min on google and considering it was almost 20 years ago do you really expect it to look identical? be honest, rounded rectangle in glossy black, is not rocket science.
I am not going to waste my time arguing with fanboi's who think apple invented the symmetrical boarder, the color black and the fucking rectangle, have fun in your happy land made up of rainbows and unicorns
Re:Why would it be radically different? (Score:5, Informative)
I have both an iPad and a Galaxy Tab. I also have an HP Touchpad. I have on a couple of occasions grabbed the Tab thinking I was going for the iPad, and vice-versa. They actually are strikingly similar. I have never mistaken the Touchpad for either of the other two.
You can look at jpegs of the devices in question until you're blue in the face, but when you actually have your hands on them it's embarrassingly clear that Samsung copied the iPad down to tiny little details. That's why the 'rounded corners' bit of the case is only one of twenty five details Apple took issue with.
Re: (Score:3)
The original Galaxy Tab was significantly different in many ways, and honestly, people hated it. It barely sold. Hundreds of thousands were returned to Samsung by retailers.
The Galaxy Tab 10.1 (which I assume is what you have?) was an intentional redesign (this is not a secret to anyone in the industry) to make it look as much like the iPad as possible. It's selling a lot better...
Personally, unless it's specifically patented or trademarked, I think Apple should just stop whining, imitation is not a crim
Re: (Score:3)
It's specifically trademarked and, in some cases, patented.
And yes, designing your product to look too much like another is a crime. Thus why Apple hasn't gotten thrown out of court and buying a Versacci bag in Venice will net you a $10,000 fine.
Re: (Score:3)
Abusing a trademark and/or trying to pass off a product is a crime, sure - but Samsung is not selling an "Appel ePad". Rounded corners and black bezels can't be (and weren't) trademarked or patented. Just because their outer case looks similar (even intentionally) does not make it illegal.
If they used copyrighted Apple software, violated patents on the software or hardware, etc, inside the device, that's another story. But that's not what we were talking about here.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Far more likely to be 1.5x not 2x (Score:5, Insightful)
Anyone who has ever written iOS software knows that the UI scaling is done by float, and can easily take a value of 1.5.
It can technically be done, but results will look like crap, because scaling of bitmaps does not look well if you don't use an integer factor - either you get some pixels larger than other, or you need to use interpolation, resulting in an altogether blurry picture. There's a reason why Apple did 2x upscale with iPhone 4, rather than going for the then industry-standard-already 480x800.
Besides, from TFA, it looks like they have already identified the specific LCD screen that looks like it's tailor made for iPad 3 in dimensional terms - and it's 2048x1536.
Re: (Score:3)
It can technically be done, but results will look like crap, because scaling of bitmaps does not look well if you don't use an integer factor
Why do you assume they are using bitmaps? In this day and age everything from icons to fonts should be vector.
Re:Far more likely to be 1.5x not 2x (Score:4, Informative)
No, you're talking about bitmap scaling which is not what is happening. When you create an iPhone 4 app you provide separate graphics at the new resolution. The same would be done here. UI elements are also native images for the resolution.
When you create a new app, or update one, sure. But it won't happen overnight; in the meantime, existing apps should be usable. iPhone 4 can still run apps created for iPhone 3 and below. And the reason why it can do that without them looking like crap is because it scales them up using an integer factor.
Re: (Score:2)
You must be new to that whole "Apple" thing. It will be available in stores when Apple CEO will come out and say "It's now available in stores".
Re:Why does Apple/iPad get so much attention? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Why does Apple/iPad get so much attention? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Samsung released a little 7" tablet running Android 2.2 about five months after the iPad. The first commercial hardware running a Tablet version of Android was the Motorola Xoom, released 10 months after the iPad. Prior to that, there were a few utterly forgettable Android tablets from Archos, Dell and MSI. Apple's brand recognition, marketing clout, industrial design and the App Store helped to build a market segment that no one else had b
Re: (Score:3)
Exactly! All Apple does is market to know-nothing hipsters with more money than sense and if all these people would just pay attention to what the smart people on Slashdot have to say they wouldn't be waisting all this money on useless tablet computers that can't even compile a basic python script or run a 3D CAD/CAM controller app.