Samsung gets competitive with Galaxy Tab 8.9, 10.1

Samsung gets competitive with Galaxy Tab 8.9, 10.1

Summary: Samsung has taken the desire to compete with the iPad seriously, as the two new Galaxy Tab tablets are priced less than the iPad, and are thinner.

SHARE:
TOPICS: Samsung, Tablets
54

Samsung has officially launched its extension to the Galaxy Tab line with the expected 8.9-inch and 10.1-inch models. Cleverly named the Galaxy Tab 8.9 and 10.1, the two tablets will carry on the line started last year with the original 7-inch Galaxy Tab. The Tab 8.9 will be priced starting at $469 and the 10.1 at $499, each with 16 GB of storage for the starting price. Samsung has taken the desire to compete with the iPad seriously, as the new tablets are priced less than the Apple tablet, and are thinner.

The new Galaxy Tabs will ship with the Honeycomb version of Android that is optimized for tablets, but will have Samsung's TouchWIZ interface enhancements on top of it. This may not appeal to those who prefer leaving Android devices with a stock interface, but early photos show it may not be a bad thing.

The new Tabs will be available starting June 8 (10.1 model), and will be available configured as follows:

Galaxy Tab 8.9: WiFi only, 16GB $469; 32GB $569; 64GB (price unconfirmed)

Galaxy Tab 10.1: WiFi only, 16GB $499; 32GB $599; 64GB (price unconfirmed)

Both the Tab 8.9 and 10.1 sport a dual-core processor running at 1 GHz, and displays offering resolution of 1280x600. The smaller of the two weighs in at just over a pound and the larger is 1.3 pounds, making them very light for the screen size. Samsung has not announced carrier partners for the 3G (or 4G) enabled versions of the Tabs.

Topics: Samsung, Tablets

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

Talkback

54 comments
Log in or register to join the discussion
  • RE: Samsung gets competitive with Galaxy Tab 8.9, 10.1

    Cool. Andriod finally finds real competition to the iPad.

    Grats Samsung - hope you do well.
    samalie
    • Samsung advanced indeed, but James is (not)wrong about theirs tablets being

      @samalie: thinner. Galaxy Tab 10.1 is 20% (about 2 mm) thicker than iPad 2 (10.9 mm against 8.8 mm: EDIT: see comment at the bottom of this post).<br><br>Also, while the screen has 30% better clarity/details than iPad's, it lacks IPS technology and it's layers are not glued together to fight parasitic refraction.<br><br>Also, given Motorola Xoom's two-hours and half worse battery performance on Honeycomb Android 3.0 with the same NVidea Tegra2 hardware and screen resolution, just half hour better is expected for Galaxy Tab 10.1 (half hour adds because of the batter itself is 5,5% better capacity than that of Xoom).<br><br>At the same time, Tegra 2 is established to have *times* weaker graphic performance, as well as *times* weaker methematics/FP performance (they chose cheaper reference design from ARM with no proper FPU).<br><br>Galaxy Tab is plasticky (dissipates warmth worse) and has very little tablet applications (comparing to iPad's 65000).<br><br>Galaxy Tab also has no AirPlay or AirPrint capabilities, no smart covers. The OS is a bit cluttery and less polished/consistent. As of now, it still crashes a lot.<br><br><b>All in all, Galaxy Tab is much weaker in everything</b> except for raw screen resolution.<br><br><i><b>EDIT</b>: there is no reference to the source in James' blog entry, so I compared iPad 2 to the </i>first<i> release of the non-existent unreleased Galaxy Tab 10.1. But actually now, today, we have </i>second<i> release of non-existent unreleased Galaxy Tab 10.1, which is a quarter of the year away, but will actually indeed be thinner -- a whole 0.2 mm thinner, no less. Yet with shrinking 2.3 mm in thickness in one month, the battery life of Galaxy Tab 10.1 is going be like six hours.</i>
      DDERSSS
      • RE: Samsung gets competitive with Galaxy Tab 8.9, 10.1

        @denisrs the XOOM gets 12+ hour battery life so I don't know where you're getting your information. It's wrong.
        JamesKendrick
      • Both WSJ and Engadged tested Xoom and got 8-8.5 hours of battery life

        @JamesKendrick: this compares to two-two and half hours better battery life with iPad 2 in the very same tests by the same Engadget and WSJ.
        DDERSSS
      • @James: Are you sure?

        denisrs has always been right about everything else he has posted and Apple products have always had longer battery lives than any competing product so I doubt very much that the Xoom gets more battery life than the iPad. I doubt it very much.

        Thanks for the feature list comparison denisrs, it is a very important consideration when looking to buy a device. Before I started looking for a tablet, I stated to myself that I would refuse to buy any tablet thicker than 10.5mm so right there, the Galaxy Tab is eliminated from consideration. I also had stringent requirements that the cover I bought for the tablet would have to work with magnets and no one but Apple has implemented such a smart cover yet. Finally, there can be no plastic on the device. I will be seen in public with this thing so my image is very important. Apple gets big bonuses too just for having the Apple logo on the device which is pretty much the international sign of getting respect.

        I'm a huge fan of Apple but I would consider buying something from the competition as soon as the competition puts out something with the correct features and specifications list.
        edtimes
      • RE: Samsung gets competitive with Galaxy Tab 8.9, 10.1

        @denisrs

        New 10.1 and the 8.9 are thinner @ 8.6mm. Are you too busy scrambling to tout Apple that you can't bother reading real facts?
        noagenda
      • @noagenda: I doubt that very much

        Apple's devices have always been thinner than the competition so I doubt that the Tab could be thinner than the iPad.

        Also, how much does the Tab weigh? If it weighs any more than the iPad 2 then that is also a showstopper. I forgot to mention that in my previous list of reasons why I wouldn't buy the Tab.
        edtimes
      • RE: Samsung gets competitive with Galaxy Tab 8.9, 10.1

        @edtimes

        See the link ....
        http://www.trustedreviews.com/laptops/news/2011/03/22/Samsung-Announces-World-s-Thinnest-Tablets/p1
        As an avowed Apple fanboi .. are you sure you would ever consider something non-Apple? I just don't 'get' the MS, Apple, Open Source propellar heads. I wouldn't care if a device was made by Matel ... if it had the quality and features I deemed appropriate for my needs and cost threshold, I wouldn't let some missplaced brand loyalty blind me.
        noagenda
      • Being ignorant is one thing, but being **aggressively** ignorant -- is ...

        @agenda: ... another. You have reached new lows with this.

        <b>Galaxy Tab 10.1 dimensions: 246.2 x 170.4 x 10.9 (in mm)</b>
        DDERSSS
      • @agenda (nice one denisrs, removing his &quot;no&quot;!!)

        [i] if it had the quality and features I deemed appropriate for my needs and cost threshold[/i]

        I agree. No one can argue that Apple has the best quality, bar none. They buy up all the high quality components leaving Samsung and others with lower end stuff.

        And for features, didn't you read what I wrote? I stated right up front that I would refuse to buy anything that was thicker than 10.5mm. Since the Tab is 0.1mm thicker, it does not match my specifications.
        edtimes
      • RE: Samsung gets competitive with Galaxy Tab 8.9, 10.1

        @denisrs
        You are quoting dimensions for the original 10" pad ... not the current (referenced in the original blog post) announced version. If I am sometimes ignorant it is by omission ... not by blind, brand allegence, commission like you!

        The announced TODAY, 10.1 and 8.9 appliances are 8.6 mm thick. I don't much care what some other appliance thickness is as that is NOT what is under discussion here. In fact, I don't think a whopping delta of 1 mm let alone .2 mm is all that big a deal. I just tire of the (pick a brand) FanBois spreading crap to favor their pick, with the intention of belittling anyone who has a different opinion.
        noagenda
      • @JamesKendrick in COMPARATIVE tests Xoom's battery sucks vs iPad

        @JamesKendrick<br><br>Wall street Journal comparing xoom to iPad One:<br><br>"Alas, while the Xoom claims up to 10 hours of video playback, I got just 7 hours and 32 minutes. By contrast, on the same test, the iPad, which also claims 10 hours, logged 11.5 hours, or four hours more."<br><br>iPad FOUR hours more! That's with NO flash running on xoom. <br><br>the ipad 2 according to WSJ has slightly less battery life than iPad 1 but still over 10 hrs. <br><br>Ars Technica, Anandtech etc tests also show iPad 2 GPU performance also trouncing xoom by a wide margin like GLbenchmark fill rate the iPad is about 7 times faster than the xoom.
        Davewrite
      • RE: Samsung gets competitive with Galaxy Tab 8.9, 10.1

        @denisrs Apologize, I misunderstood your comment about the battery life. I am getting 12 hours real-world on the XOOM, iPad aside, which is more than acceptable in my book.
        JamesKendrick
      • RE: Samsung gets competitive with Galaxy Tab 8.9, 10.1

        @JamesKendrick - I would like to know where you're getting your information on battery being 12 hours from (is it from your own review of the unit?).<br><br>Because according to those that reviewed it, here's what some had to say:<br><br><b>WSJ:</b><br><br>"Alas, while the Xoom claims up to 10 hours of video playback, I got just 7 hours and 32 minutes. By contrast, on the same test, the iPad (1), which also claims 10 hours, logged 11.5 hours, or four hours more."<br><br><b>Arstechnica:</b><br><br>"The Xoom's 24.5 Whr battery is rated for 9 hours of Web browsing and approximately 14 days of standby time. During our tests, we got roughly 7 and a half hours during of battery life during mixed intensive use."<br><br><a href="http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/reviews/2011/03/ars-reviews-the-motorola-xoom.ars" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"><a href="http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/reviews/2011/03/ars-reviews-the-motorola-xoom.ars" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"><a href="http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/reviews/2011/03/ars-reviews-the-motorola-xoom.ars" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"><a href="http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/reviews/2011/03/ars-reviews-the-motorola-xoom.ars" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/reviews/2011/03/ars-reviews-the-motorola-xoom.ars</a></a></a></a><br><br><b>Engadget:</b><br><br>"Running a video on loop with the screen set at 65 percent brightness, we were able to get playback for nearly eight and a half hours (8:20 to be exact). Motorola claims up to ten, so we weren't far off the mark at all." (iPad 1 received 9:33 and iPad 2 10:26, btw).<br><br>Apple iPad 2 - 10:26<br>Apple iPad 1 - 9:33<br>Motorola Xoom - 8:20<br>Dell Streak 7 - 3:26<br>Archos 101 - 7:20<br>Samsung Galaxy Tab - 6:09
        dave95.
      • RE: Samsung gets competitive with Galaxy Tab 8.9, 10.1

        @edtimes

        Because I pointed out the error in dimesions ought not, to a thinking person, intimate I do have an agenda. I own products from a wide variety of makers, including Apple. This does not, however, reduce me to reject out of hand, a product made by a competitor. Unlike you, I am not a drone. Nor, in the face of reasoned argument, do Istoop to name calling.

        I did, indeed, read your post. That is why I linked an article that disabused you of the notion that the announced today, 10.1 and 8.9 devices were touted to be 8.6 mm thick rather than the greater than 10.5 mm upper limit you stated as a deal breaker. So, while I DID read your post, did you bother reading the article I linked?

        BTW, that last was a retorical question as it is obvious you did not ....
        noagenda
      • @agenda: The Tab sounds too thin

        It will probably break or slip out of your hands because it is too thin to be sturdy or ergonomic. No, 8.8mm is just right.

        And the battery life is terrible.

        And the screen layers aren't glued together.

        No thanks. When Samsung can make something better than the iPad 2, I'll consider it but the Tab as it currently stands has a very weak features and specifications list. Look at Apple's marketcap, it is much bigger than Samsung's. Apple got there by releasing better products than Samsung did. There is no reason to believe that this has changed.
        edtimes
      • All right, so this new 10.1 is new release of unreleased nonexistent tablet

        @noagenda: however, this time Samsung conveniently omitted battery's capacity.<br><br>So while in my original post above Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1 was cited to have 5.5% better capacity battery than that of Xoom, this time it quite well might be <b>really below</b>. Six hours of battery life, anyone?<br><br>Sorry for not believing in the reference about thinness -- James' blog entry does not contain a reference to actual specifications. Sorry to James for calling him wrong about the thickness. New Galaxy Tab 10.1 (comes in June) is going to be 0.2 mm thinner indeed (though, this will not help to deal with other shortcomings I listed and it is a whole quarter of non-existance yet).
        DDERSSS
    • RE: Samsung gets competitive with Galaxy Tab 8.9, 10.1

      @samalie <br>Competition only on the hardware front.<br>App competition is another thing all together.<br>Until apps are developed with a larger screen in mind, the available apps which run well on an Android tablet are few and far between.<br>This has been the biggest disappointment I've had with my Android tablets.
      camcost
  • RE: Samsung gets competitive with Galaxy Tab 8.9, 10.1

    @wildmind
    The original Galaxy Tab had one, so I think it would be a safe assumption.
    hoaxoner
  • RE: Samsung gets competitive with Galaxy Tab 8.9, 10.1

    @wildmind The memory capacities quotes are via microSD card.
    JamesKendrick