AAPL Stock: 118.3 ( + 0.49 )

Printed from

Review: Samsung Galaxy Tab

updated 05:00 pm EST, Sun December 12, 2010

We test the Samsung Galaxy Tab

In the mobile phone landscape, Android represents one of the biggest threats to Apple. With the introduction of the iPad, though, the battle has moved on to tablets; Apple has almost had the market to itself. Samsung's Galaxy Tab is the first honest, mainstream competitor using Android. It has some features that the iPad currently lacks, such as dual cameras and support for Flash, but we'll see in our Galaxy Tab review how well it holds up.

by MacNN Staff



  1. global.philosopher

    Joined: Dec 1969


    Too small...too expensive

    Samsung have their marketing arse about. For the small screen size and lack of OS/app support it should be cheaper not more expensive or equally priced to the iPad. In addition they have done little market research and have simply copied Apple's innovation so they saved money there too. Looks like they think their brand name is worth more than it truley is.

  1. climacs

    Joined: Dec 1969


    review nails it

    Samsung was indeed more concerned about rushing to market rather than putting out a quality product.

    You only get 1 chance to make a good first impression, and like nearly all the Apple copycats, Samsung has blown it.

    I'm sure they will sell some to masochists like Wrenchy who have an irrational hatred for all things Apple, but it's not going to be much of a threat to iPad and if anything, it will remind people that Apple products are the best.

  1. Foe Hammer

    Joined: Dec 1969


    How Can You Call Wretchy's Hatred of All Things Ap

    ... "irrational," climacs? By your own analysis - and by definition - a m******** derives pleasure from pain. What better way for Wretchy to achieve ultimate masochistic gratification in the technology world than by willfully depriving him/her/itself of Apple products? Hence the term "textbook case."

  1. 001

    Joined: Dec 1969


    Love it

    "Flash often a liability, not a help."

  1. chas_m



    Doesn't matter

    The Galaxy Tab will sell in modest numbers, and that's okay: everyone who buys one or doesn't knows the same thing: if it hadn't been for Apple, there would BE no Galaxy Tab or indeed much of a tablet market at all. We know this because the tablet market existed (if you can call it that) for years, and then ONE THING changed last year and suddenly its the hottest category in tech. Name that one thing, and guess what, it wasn't "Samsung decides to build a half-decent tablet."

    Same thing with smartphones. They existed before Apple (barely). But now EVERY smartphone is a copy of the iPhone and iOS. Android simply wouldn't exist had it not been for the iPhone.

    So irrational haters of Apple, buy your copycat devices running their copycat OSes all day for all I care. The reality is that Apple makes those copycat devices possible, and the other reality is that most people know who's the innovator and who's the copycat -- and buy accordingly.

  1. chas_m




    Very good, fair, evenhanded review IMO.

  1. DerekMorr

    Joined: Dec 1969


    more bias from electronista

    This is a rather biased review.

    Why do they prattle so much about the alleged thickness of the device? It's actually (slightly) thinner than an iPad. Perhaps the Tab seems thicker than it is because of its small size. Also, why is Samsung's use of PDMI called "reactionary?" PDMI is an open standard; it's also used on the Dell Streak. This use of weasel words further illustrates the bias of the reviewers.

    The paragraph on the hardware buttons is also flawed. One does not need to wait for Honeycomb for on-screen buttons that change orientation. The Archos101 does this today.

    The review also slights the Tab for running Android 2.2, "which is no longer the most recent version." 2.3 isn't even shipping yet! It's been announced, but no shipping device has it. Criticizing Samsung for not shipping 2.3 is ridiculous and once again shows the bias and sloppiness in the review.

    The reviewers say that "there isn't currently a system in place to write specifically for tablets versus phones, let alone a universal development system." They apparently haven't read Google's developer documents, which detail how to design alternative layouts for different screen resolutions and pixel densities. See, for example, this page in the Android dev docs - - or this talk from Google I/O 2010 -

  1. xmlaroux

    Joined: Dec 1969



    You can't write an objective review here as everyone loves to donate their money to Steve.

    I like Apple products as I have many Pod's, touches. But I don't like being locked in place. My kids have touches, I have a Droid. I love my Droid, wouldn't change it for anything.

    All, if not 95% of reviews are bias in my opinion. The Archos line is a prime example of a great product, priced correctly, and delivers what it says. The Archos tablets don't imitate the iPad, they push Apple to grow. Everyone here in this forum have never seen an Archos tablet. I bet Google is learning from Archos on how to design Honeycomb.

    I love how Samsung is beat up on 2.3... prime example of the view from Appleland.

    Have you noticed that IOS now has updates every month? Didn't it only get updated once or twice a year? Now iOS users get goodness many times a year. They need to thank Google for that, not bash.

  1. vasic

    Joined: Dec 1969


    no bias here

    The review is absolutely correct; there is simply no system in place to write specifically for tablets. The android dev doc you refer to applies only to smartphones of various screen sizes and resolutions. Google has stated many times that Android is NOT suitable for tablet use yet; at least not until honeycomb arrives. All those different pixel densities and screen resolutions are available for phones; NOT tablets. Those who think there is no fundamental difference between the two categories are seriously mistaken. Google themselves apparently don't, which is why they recommend tablet makers wait for 3.0.

  1. mytdave

    Joined: Dec 1969


    questionable bias

    I didn't like the review much at all. I think it didn't give enough credit to the Tab and to the iPad in a number of cases, and at the same time also seemed quite inaccurate toward both devices in other areas.

    Having used both devices, I think the iPad is the far superior device. But clearly, the review is perplexing in some comments, such as how they think rotating the Tab has any affect on how the hardware buttons work, or the comment of Apple not understanding the Internet... The hardware buttons on the Tab are fine in any orientation unless you're stupid, and Apple clearly understands the Internet, far more than lots of companies - not having to trust the cloud is a bonus.

    At this juncture, I'd prefer a new review by some other folks.

Login Here

Not a member of the MacNN forums? Register now for free.


Network Headlines

Follow us on Facebook


Most Popular


Recent Reviews

Ultimate Ears Megaboom Bluetooth Speaker

Ultimate Ears (now owned by Logitech) has found great success in the marketplace with its "Boom" series of Bluetooth speakers, a mod ...

Kinivo URBN Premium Bluetooth Headphones

We love music, and we're willing to bet that you do, too. If you're like us, you probably spend a good portion of your time wearing ...

Jamstik+ MIDI Controller

For a long time the MIDI world has been dominated by keyboard-inspired controllers. Times are changing however, and we are slowly star ...


Most Commented