Four Worthless Samsung Galaxy Tab Reviews and One Useful
brooksreview.net
brooksreview.net
Is this journalistic bias, or is there a background process or bug that was affecting some reviewers and not others?
The smaller size gives extra mobility and actually makes it easier to type with. I can hold the entire device on both ends and be able to type with thumbs naturally.
Every review where the browser was ever described as "slow" had Flash turned perma on. The Android 2.2 browser is the fastest of the bunch, and the Tab has one of the fastest CPUs, so it's the only explanation.
Samsung and others need to push back against Adobe on this. The Flash thing is a good option in the bag, but it's hurting reviews.
Other than that, sometimes what is a critical deficiency for one reviewer just really doesn't matter much to another.
I have zero interest in the Tab. I think it's a premature product, and I don't know why someone would get it over an iPad.
Having said that, the Gizmodo review is terrible, and it is, by far, the outlier: Everyone else is generally positive, and then you have the over the top criticisms of Gizmodo.
Like-
Which means, conversely, that there's almost no added benefit to using the Tab over a phone. It's not big enough. Web browsing doesn't have greater fidelity. I don't get more out of Twitter. A magazine app would be cramped."
Aside from the improved resolution (or does an iPhone 4 not have more "fidelity" than a 3GS?), 7" is a world different than 3.5-4.0". Perhaps it's just that I actually browse on my phone a lot, but I find this criticism oof Gimzodo's bizarre and...well...a bit "pick up the talking points from Steve Jobs". You know the whole ridiculous "sandpaper your fingers" bit.
If 7" isn't usable, then what the hell are people bothering paying good money for 3.5" iPhones for? Clearly they're completely unusable.
This is why I think the author came frustratingly close to having a good point. If 7" is so different, then shouldn't applications be different? Shouldn't there be more applications making use of that difference just as iOS applications may have different layouts on an iPhone than they do on an iPad?
I don't mean to suggest that it's impossible for Android developers to make 7"-targeted apps, but at the present time it doesn't seem like there is much reason to, giving the iPad an edge.
Absolutely. A big thing about Froyo on tablets is that most apps assume that you have a small screen: The default email readers, for instance, show a singular list of emails, and then you open it and the single email takes the screen.
There is a very flexible layout engine in Android, and apps are by default resolution and aspect ratio independent, but making an app with a view pane, for instance, just isn't high on many people's priorities given the lack of real world targets.
Though of course the browser fully takes advantage of the larger screen and resolution, as does video. Both of those are the number 1 reason why people want a larger screen in the first place.
The complaint is that 7" is in a no-mans-land between pocketable-and-good-enough and something that justifies being carried in a bag (better for more complex tasks and/or longer sessions).
Gizmodo is arguing that the Galaxy isn't better than a pocketable device, except for reading/browsing/video. But at the point that you're dealing with a secondary unpocketable device, the Galaxy has no advantage over the iPad except weight and Flash support that you wind up leaving disabled by default because it causes usability problems.
So unless flash-based browsing is a must and barely-better content consumption is enough to justify carrying a second device in a bag, it's very hard to make a case for the Galaxy.
That's Steve Jobs angle because Apple currently makes an 10" iPad, and now have a black hole between it and the iphone. As someone who uses PMPs and internet appliances, though, I find it to be an incredible lie.
Having a much lighter, smaller, easily holdable-in-one-hand device == a HUGE advantage. The Kindle carries big advantages over the iPad for the same reason.
So unless flash-based browsing is a must and barely-better content consumption is enough to justify carrying a second device in a bag, it's very hard to make a case for the Galaxy.
I doubt many people plan on getting one to carry in a bag. This will primarily be an internet appliance, either kept at the office or on the bedtime side table or coffee table. The idea that someone is going to tote it around is ridiculous, though it's just as ridiculous that people are going to tote around an iPad and use it at, for instance, a coffee shop.
It's not a lie, it's a personal, subjective assessment.
> "The idea that someone is going to tote it around is ridiculous, though it's just as ridiculous that people are going to tote around an iPad and use it at, for instance, a coffee shop."
Given that people do tote around their ipad from home to work, to meetings, to coffee shops, to friends houses, I don't think it's at all ridiculous.
By the way, the Tab isn't the only device that plays Flash, I hear that some phones have this ability too. Not that this weakens your point, it actually strengthens it. Just thought it was a bit weird to highlight an entirely common feature as if it was somehow a USP for the Tab. An unwitting Apple bias perhaps?
These are reviews. They are based on some empirical data but still mostly based on the individual reviewers perception of the device. Of course there is bias, the whole concept of going into a review without bias is flawed.
I'd also question whether feeling "like a total dorkface while typing" is classed as a usability issue.