The iPad Finally Has a Worthy Rival: Samsung's Galaxy Tab 10.1

Apple (Nasdaq: AAPL  ) may be the world's largest electronics company as measured by market capitalization, but Samsung is the largest by sales. So it makes sense that the Seoul, Korea-based giant -- not Microsoft, not HP, not Motorola, not Dell -- would the first to compete seriously in the market that Apple invented last year with the introduction of the iPad. If Samsung wants to stay on top, it needs a tablet device that compares well not just with the iPad, but with the sleeker, more powerful iPad 2.

And that, I can now tell you first-hand, is exactly what the new Galaxy Tab 10.1 does. When you hear "Galaxy Tab," erase any thoughts you may have of the awkward, plasticky, overgrown phone that Samsung brought out under that name last September. The 10.1 is so different from its predecessor that it really deserves a new name rather than a number (the "10.1" refers to the screen's diagonal size in inches, which is slightly larger than the screen on the iPad 2). My vote would be to call it the "Me2Pad" -- that's how similar this device is to its Apple cousin, at least in outward appearance and physical characteristics. The software inside is another matter: the Galaxy Tab's Android 3.0 "Honeycomb" operating system couldn't be more different from Apple's iOS. But more on that in a moment.

The Galaxy Tab 10.1 will be available in U.S. retail stores starting June 8 at price points that match Apple's: $499 for a 16-gigabyte unit, $599 for 32 gigabytes. (There's no 64-gigabyte version.) I've been testing the device since Tuesday, when I was one of 5,000 attendees at the Google I/O developer conference in San Francisco who were given free units, courtesy of Google and Samsung.

Don't worry, we haven't changed our policy on gifts at Xconomy -- we don't accept them, and as soon as we're done reviewing this unit, we're probably going to give it away to someone in our community (stay tuned for the details). Meanwhile, though, I wanted to describe some of my early impressions of the Galaxy Tab 10.1 and tell you why I think it's the first device worth considering as a serious alternative to the iPad 2. I'm not necessarily saying you should spend your $499 on a Galaxy Tab rather than an iPad; I'm just saying it's the first iPad rival that can't be dismissed out of hand.

Let's start with the hardware. With its aluminum rim and its black bezel, the Galaxy Tab 10.1 can easily be mistaken from a distance for a black iPad. Once you get closer, though, you notice that the screen has a different shape: it has a widescreen 1.6:1 aspect ratio, in contrast to the iPad's 4:3 ratio. I think that gives the Galaxy Tab an advantage in some situations, such as watching a wide-screen movie in landscape orientation or reading long Web pages in portrait orientation.

In most other physical respects, the Galaxy Tab and the iPad 2 are effectively identical. The Galaxy Tab weighs slightly less (595 grams compared to 601 grams) and is thinner by a hair (8.6 millimeters compared to 8.8 millimeters). Its screen has a few more pixels, meaning the resolution is slightly higher -- 1280×800 compared to 1024×768.

But a tablet computer is really just a magical glass touchscreen; it's the apps that run on it that count. And in this department, Apple still has a huge advantage. There are more than 80,000 apps designed specifically for the iPad, compared to just a few hundred optimized for Honeycomb, the first version of Google's Android mobile operating system designed specifically for tablets.

So why would you even think about spending $499 or $599 for a Samsung tablet when the same money spent on an iPad gets you access to so many more tablet apps? Actually, there are a few reasons. In order of least important to most important:

1. The Galaxy Tab 10.1 has two speakers, compared to the iPad's single speaker. So you can get stereo sound out of the device without having to don headphones -- and the sound is a lot louder than the iPad's.

2. The Galaxy Tab's cameras are way better than the iPad's. The front-facing camera, used mainly for video chat, has a resolution of 2 megapixels, compared to 0.3 megapixels on the iPad. The rear facing camera, used for shooting video and photos, is 3 megapixels, compared to a paltry 0.7 megapixels on the iPad. (I'm very glad the iPad 2 has cameras -- their omission crippled the original iPad, in my opinion -- but it's still a mystery to me why they're so poor for anything other than shooting video.)

3. Some people simply dislike Apple. Whether it's because of the company's secretive, almost totalitarian corporate culture; Steve Jobs' reputation as an imperious and demanding manager; the company's strict control over which apps can be distributed through the iTunes App Store; the substantial cut the company takes on each sale through iTunes; or just the high-end hardware prices -- a lot of people would rather spend their money elsewhere. I get that. It doesn't stop me from buying Apple products, but I get it. With the Galaxy Tab 10.1, you can have an iPad-level product experience without enriching Apple.

4. Android. In the post-PC era, there is a war going on for the hearts and souls of mobile device users. The question is whether people will get most of their mobile apps from a closed ecosystem like iOS/iTunes, where Apple maintains strict control over which apps can run on its devices, ostensibly in order to maintain high quality, or from a semi-open system like Android, where Google maintains looser control, equipment manufacturers get to put their own spin on the operating system, and no one polices the app developers. (Eventually there could be a third possibility -- Web-based apps delivered via mobile browsers, as advocated by players like OpenAppMkt. But right now, Web apps are crippled by restrictions on the way they access mobile devices' native functions, such as graphics processing.) If you're a hardcore believer in openness, then an Android device like the Galaxy Tab 10.1 is the ideologically purer option.

A word, however, about Android from a user's point of view. I was an Android virgin before I got my hands on the Samsung device, and I've spent a lot of time this week stumbling over the operating system's disorienting quirks. Let's take navigating between apps as an example. On the iPhone and the iPad, which are the mobile devices I'm most familiar with, the home button on the front of the device always pops you out of whatever app you're in and gets you back to the home screen. The Galaxy Tab 10.1 doesn't have a home button. Instead, there are three inscrutably designed soft buttons in the lower left corner of the screen. One seems to function like a "back" button in a Web browser, taking you back to whatever you were doing just previously. Another sends you to the home screen. The third brings up a tray showing the last five apps you accessed. But I'm not quite sure about all that -- the functions of these soft buttons seem to change depending on the context I'm in.

It's overkill, and it provides a perfect contrast between two competing design philosophies -- let's call them Simplicity and Flexibility. If you believe in Simplicity, you pare everything down to one button, you make its function drop-dead obvious, and you funnel the user toward that one choice. If you love Flexibility, you go with three buttons, you layer on the options, and you give users an array of possible paths to the same end goal (say, opening a new app). Generally speaking, Apple's culture values Simplicity and Google's culture values Flexibility -- and those competing philosophies are baked so deeply into their products, you can almost smell them.

So it comes down to a question of which aroma you prefer. The nice thing about the Galaxy Tab 10.1 is that it's the first non-Apple tablet where the rest of the ingredients don't stink.

http:/g.fool.com/img/Article/partners/Xconomy200x40.gif

More from Xconomy.com:

Wade Roush is Xconomy's chief correspondent and editor of Xconomy San Francisco. You can email him at wroush@xconomy.com or follow him on Twitter at twitter.com/wroush. You can subscribe to his Google Group and you can follow all Xconomy San Francisco stories at twitter.com/xconomysf.

The Fool owns shares of Apple and Microsoft. Motley Fool newsletter services have recommended Apple. Motley Fool newsletter services have recommended Microsoft. Motley Fool newsletter services have recommended Microsoft. Motley Fool newsletter services have recommended creating a bull call spread position in Apple. Motley Fool newsletter services have recommended creating a diagonal call position in Microsoft. 

Try any of our Foolish newsletter services free for 30 days. We Fools may not all hold the same opinions, but we all believe that considering a diverse range of insights makes us better investors. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.


Read/Post Comments (8) | Recommend This Article (3)

Comments from our Foolish Readers

Help us keep this a respectfully Foolish area! This is a place for our readers to discuss, debate, and learn more about the Foolish investing topic you read about above. Help us keep it clean and safe. If you believe a comment is abusive or otherwise violates our Fool's Rules, please report it via the Report this Comment Report this Comment icon found on every comment.

  • Report this Comment On May 13, 2011, at 12:42 PM, gslusher wrote:

    Good article, but, in answer to this:

    "but it's still a mystery to me why they're so poor for anything other than shooting video."

    Have you actually tried taking a photo with a large tablet like the iPad, Xoom, etc? It's an ergonomic nightmare. You'll probably have to hold it in one hand, which is awkward and almost guaranteed to result in a tilted picture. Cellphone cameras are bad enough: the photos from them are worse than most $100 point-and-shoot cameras. (Don't look at them on the phone's tiny screen. Transfer them to a computer and blow them up. You'll see what I mean.) They're really bad in low light (small sensor for the number of megapixels), don't focus well, etc. On the other hand, they're fine for what they are--a convenient camera to carry. I woudln't deliberately choose to use one for almost anything if I had a choice.

    The tablet camera results I've seen are even worse. I'm not talking about the "sample" images shown on the manufacturer's websites. I really doubt that those were taken holding the tablet. Instead, the tablet was probably locked down on a support like a tripod. Other tricks were probably used to make the photos look better. (E.g., use the "self-timer" so that the tablet can settle down after the "button" is touched.) Who knows what processing was applied. They're at least scaled down to fit a web page, which makes them look sharper (to a point).

    The iPad front-facing camera is obviously for Facetime chats. The rear-facing camera is really for augmented reality, like the apps that superimpose data about restaurants on the live video image on the iPad.

  • Report this Comment On May 13, 2011, at 1:36 PM, Sunpowergo wrote:

    Great ,the US press is hell bent to promote a foreign company that if not outright stealing at the least plagiarizing a premium US company and their products.

    I don't have any problem with companies that have their own ideas, but this is idiotic. When did Samsung create anything as revolutionary as the Ipad, or even the Ipod touch?

    Why promote something ( on questionable premise) that might almost as good, but cost the same, but takes the profits away from your next door neighbor? Made in USA (and I know the Ipad is not manufactured in USA, just invented and designed) means somebody in your community gets to eat..

  • Report this Comment On May 13, 2011, at 2:00 PM, Oldfool103 wrote:

    If all things are equal, I think nationalism can help with a decision. (Of course, some portion of revenue from Galaxy searches will presumably end up in Google coffers.) As a Canadian, your economic health will trickle up to demand for our commodities, and that would be another determinant for me. Mostly, though, I prefer to shop with companies that are developing things, rather than those that are just stealing others' ideas.

    Perhaps this will be the pattern for the next couple of years: Apple wipes the floor with its new release, copycats introduce their "good as" products, commentators try to find reasons for imminent Apple failure in the face of increasing top line revenues, and hedge funds and investment

    banks keep manipulating stock prices to "win" with their options.

    As with the last meltdown, we suckers in the middle will be played for all that we are worth--quite literally. Eventually Steve will die, Apple's price will collapse, and the funds and G-S will just move on to another target.

  • Report this Comment On May 13, 2011, at 2:07 PM, T3chn0V1k1ng wrote:

    Great overview. I'll be in line Day 1 for Samsung's tablet. I prefer Android over Apple for the reasons you mentioned (more open system, flexibility). I know the iPad has more apps, but 99.9% of them I could care less about. Also going for Samsung's trademark screens and the widescreen form factor. I'm fond on Google Apps integration and that's my main reason for the choice.

  • Report this Comment On May 13, 2011, at 3:01 PM, xmmj wrote:

    When the number 1 and 2 reasons to buy a Tab are 2 speakers and better cameras, and number 3 is "you don't like Apple" then there really is no reason to go to the newer system.

    People do not buy a tablet to be a camera. They use it occasionally for a an ad hoc photo, but not for any serious shooting. I suppose if you like to sit and watch movies, and hate headphones then the speakers make a little sense. So far though, there is no real reason to switch.

    Open shmopen - what a silly thing manufactured by the rabid iHaters to create some kind of aura of political correctness. If there are specific apps you prefer on Android, or you prefer the overall UI of Android, by all means, go for it. But unless you are a hacker who wants to twiddle with the system, there is no serious reason to to prefer Android.

    People should remember that before Apple there was no way to purchase digital music legally for most of the studios, and then Apple fought hard for years to keep the price at $0.99. And the same people who tout Open System so loudly, scream bloody murder because Apple promotes the open HTML5 system over the very closed a proprietary and buggy Flash.

    But whatever your game - go for it. Good luck. Competition is good.

  • Report this Comment On May 13, 2011, at 5:47 PM, btblomberg67 wrote:

    Kill the Androids!!!

  • Report this Comment On May 13, 2011, at 8:49 PM, mattack2 wrote:

    T3chn0V1k1ng, if you "could care less" about them, it means you DO care about them.

  • Report this Comment On May 14, 2011, at 8:41 AM, felinewb wrote:

    great post!

    I think I would fall under the non-Apple crowd and the sleek look of the galaxy 10.1 + Android experience and with this post, I definately will go for it.

Add your comment.

Sponsored Links

Leaked: Apple's Next Smart Device
(Warning, it may shock you)
The secret is out... experts are predicting 458 million of these types of devices will be sold per year. 1 hyper-growth company stands to rake in maximum profit - and it's NOT Apple. Show me Apple's new smart gizmo!

DocumentId: 1494336, ~/Articles/ArticleHandler.aspx, 8/30/2014 12:28:37 AM

Report This Comment

Use this area to report a comment that you believe is in violation of the community guidelines. Our team will review the entry and take any appropriate action.

Sending report...


Advertisement