Samsung docs tease 11.8in, 2560 x 1600 tablet
My slab is bigger than your slab
Further products have been unveiled through the Samsung Apple legal spat, this time an upcoming 11.8in Samsung tablet with a 2560 x 1600 display.
The South Korean firm is working on the tablet, codenamed P10, according to court documents which timestamp the product with a 2012 release date. The 11.8in fondleslab makes an appearance in Samsung roadmaps alongside already launched products from 2011.
Last year, rumours circulated the web that Samsung would pip Apple to the post in releasing tablets with 'retina' resolutions.
An 11.8in slate with these exact display specifications was mooted at the time. However, sources went into further detail whispering about a dual-core 2GHz CPU and Android Beam, Google's feature to let users share content and contacts by touching two devices together.
Samsung has various events coming up and a ginormous presence at Berlin's consumer electronics show, IFA, to plan for, so it's possible we'll hear much more about this tablet soon. ®
COMMENTS
2560 x 1600
It'll probably be 2568 x 1608 when released. By now Apple probably has exclusivity of the 2560 x 1600 resolution (as well as the numbers 2560 and 1600 (and their squares and sqaure roots)), preventing its use ever again by another device.
Re: 2560 x 1600
>So who released a product with that resolution first? (a clue, it wasn't Samsung).
Sharp technically, although the smaller panels Apple use come with much further development and final manufacture by Samsung - with a little help from LG thrown in.
The name 'Retina Display' and sufficient customers to justify a production run is Apple's contribution. A significant one, but not really something that lives up to the innovation hot house crap we're currently enduring or which you seem to have bought wholesale.
Sod laptops or tablets, where are the desktop screens? Normally you start with a big screen and high resolution and gradually shrink it - affordable desktop monitors are 1080p (horrible shape for a monitor) or 1920x1200, anything above that moves into the silly money category.
If you can make what amounts to a complete micro-PC for ~£500, with a resolution of 2500x1600 @ 11" or thereabouts, then I should be able to buy a 24" monitor of the same resolution for around half the price (it's cheaper when it's not small).
Re: 2560 x 1600
That simply isn't correct. There was nothing novel about any part of the original iphone. Infact it lacked many features present in contemporary phones (cut and paste, tethering). However, what it did, it did very well. Apple had control of the hardware, the software and the ecosystem around it. There were phones with larger and higher res screens, there were 'candybar' phones without keyboards, apple didn't and to a large doesn't invent, it refines and controls (no bad thing).
Barring its recent retina rampage (which I welcome and is long overdue) apples main concern has been moving thinner and lighter and the consumerisation of the hardware.
As for 2560x1600 screens, they have been around for years, even dell sells them. You can buy 4k res screens, if apple were such a revolutionary company wouldn't their 27 inch desktops have 4k screens?
Re: Next lawsuit
Samsung won't call it 'Retina'. They'll call it something like RE-10A. Just to piss Apple.
