Samsung's Galaxy Tab 7.7 coming to Verizon March 1st: $499

Samsung's Galaxy Tab 7.7 coming to Verizon March 1st: $499

Summary: Announced last September, Samsung's LTE-equipped tablet will land on Verizon next month.

SHARE:

Verizon is finally spilling the beans on Samsung's Galaxy Tab 7.7: Available March 1st, the Galaxy Tab 7.7 will sell for $499 with a two-year contract.

You will, of course, be forgiven if you can't exactly recall which Samsung tablet the Galaxy Tab 7.7 is.

Revealed last September at Berlin's IFA, The Galaxy Tab 7.7's biggest pull is its 7.7-inch 1280 x 800 Super AMOLED display. Running Android 2.3, the device is equipped to run on Verizon's LTE network.

But as good as all of that sounds, the device's price tag (which, comes before the two-year data costs, keep in mind) is pretty bitter pill to swallow. This, of course, is a story we've heard before, from the Xyboard to countless others.

Topics: Laptops, Hardware, Mobility, Samsung, Tablets, Verizon

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Talkback

23 comments
Log in or register to join the discussion
  • Why wait to see what it is?

    There should be some sort of prize for any Verizon salesman who can talk somebody into buying one of these between March 1 and March 7, when the iPad3 comes out.

    Will the '3' have LTE? Will there be an 8" version? How much is that one? Only The Shadow knows.
    Robert Hahn
    • The screen

      This is all about the screen and I wanted one but not for $499 with a contract! Give me a wifi option.
      slickjim
    • So true

      +1 again
      global.philosopher
      • umm

        There is an actual +1 button now!
        slickjim
  • Is this a joke? It should be $199 without contract. On contract it should

    be free. Does this say more about Verizon or about Verizon customers? I mean wow, not in a million years.
    Johnny Vegas
  • $499 with a two year contract?

    And it's only an 8" tablet? I wonder how many will get sold? Or will Samsung lay another Egg? These should be prices closer to the Nook color, and the Kindle Fire, rather than a comparable iPad.
    Jumpin Jack Flash
    • Wrong comparison

      Why should it? The Galaxy 7.7 is a premium device.

      The Nook and Fire are gimped tablets with a mediocre user experience. Not that they're bad devices if you buy them for what they were intended, but they're not in the same class as the Galaxy.

      Do you think that a Mercedez should cost the same as a Toyota?
      qolitz
      • wrong comparison

        You obviously do if you think it should be priced the same as an iPad.
        Englishmole
      • I think we're talking Fords and Chevys here.

        If it was a "premium device," wouldn't it be running the version of the Android OS designed for tablets?
        jvitous
      • Don't be dishonest

        @Englishmole

        Don't pretend the difference between a Nook/Fire and the 7.7 is the same as the difference between the 7.7 and the iPad. If you think the iPad is supreme, it's your prerogative, but you can't honestly sit there and believe the 7.7 is in the same class as the Nook/Fire. Otherwise you're just being intellectually dishonest or ignorant.

        @jvitous
        It's unfortunate it's running an older OS, but that doesn't make it any less of a premium device when the hardware, specs, and build quality scream premium. Would you say that a device with the slowest specs and poor build quality, but "at least" has honeycomb running on it, is in your definition a "premium" device? Software is easily replaceable, hardware is not.
        qolitz
  • An awful lot of money

    $499 is an awful lot of money for a small tablet with an old version of Android and no ecosystem to support to. Fail.
    gribittmep
    • That pretty much sums it up.

      Any bets on whether it will ever be upgraded to Ice Cream Sandwich?
      matthew_maurice
    • You forgot to mention the minimum of $30/month for data

      Seriously. $500 PLUS being required to lock into a 2 year contract?

      Except for the most extreme road warriors, who really needs a 3G/4G plan 24/7 on a tablet? Free public WiFi is so prevalent it really minimizes the need for such a plan for most people. Month to month has some merit, but a 2 year contract is ridiculous, especially when the subsidized price is $499.
      TroyMcClure
  • Glad for Samsung

    Good thing Samsung is around to protect people from that expensive Apple hardware.
    dhmccoy
    • You do realize that theses cost...

      More per inch than the iPad? Also if there is no upgrade path, they are essentially obsolete before they hit the showroom.
      Jumpin Jack Flash
  • I wonder what the Koreans are Buying

    It would be nice to know if the iPads are more popular than the Samsung Galaxy in Korea. Why does Samsung price it for a total failure? They should sweeten the pot if they want customers.
    kanank
  • A Car Analogy

    If you want to use a car analogy, here's a more reasonable one. You can get a Prius (Nook, Fire); really good at what it does, but shameful when possessed by a man. You can get the Cadillac (Samsung) with all the bells and whistles, but burns a massive hole in your pocket. Or you could get the Bugatti (iPad, Prime) and be the biggest, baddest, most styling-est person on the block, hands down.

    Now if I said you could have a Bugatti for the same price as the Cadillac, why the **** would you get the Cadillac?! The pricing is horrid. If you want to sell people a cadillac, sell it at the middle class price its worth. No tablet at 7.7 inches should cost that much.
    Fat Albert 1
    • Mostly agree

      I agree with the gist you're saying but I would make a minor change. The iPad would be a Bugatti, Samsung would be a Ferrari, and the Prime would be a Cadillac. It seems more appropriate this way since the Prime is more of a "budget" high end car that offers lots of bells and whistles, while the other two are definitely a class above.
      qolitz
      • Samsung is more like a Fiat.

        Some neat tech but just does not hold up and has bad service.
        Bruizer
      • Flawed again

        @Bruizer

        The Fiat comparison is laughable and ultimately arbitrary.

        "some neat tech" is what you would use to describe Apple's humbler tech offering since they're usually a few generations behind (not that it's necessarily bad). I've found Samsung products hold up just as well as Apple products. Service however is where you see the difference. Samsung's service is generally the same as the rest of the industry except for Apple, where nobody holds a candle to them.
        qolitz