Samsung prepping 11.8” tablet with 2560×1600 panel

The unending legal war between Samsung and Apple does have some upsides. We’ve gotten glimpses of iPad and iPhone prototypes that would have otherwise stayed under lock and key in Apple’s labs, and now, court documents have revealed details about an upcoming Samsung tablet with a high-density display.

According to The Verge, that tablet is code-named P10, and it will lay out a whopping 2560×1600 pixels across an 11.8" display. That would work out to a pixel density of 256 PPI, just under the 264 DPI of the new iPad. (Of course, the iPad has a smaller, 9.7" panel with "only" 2048×1536 resolution.) 256 PPI would be denser than the 224 PPI of Asus’ Transformer Pad Infinity, however, since that tablet has a 10.1" panel with a 1920×1200 resolution.

The Verge says the upcoming Samsung device will also feature LTE connectivity, and I’m guessing it will run Android, as well. Windows 8 will also support high-PPI tablets, but it’s not coming out until October. Meanwhile, The Verge surmises that Samsung could introduce the P10 as early as next month. Samsung has teased a "major announcement and unveiling of the newest Galaxy device" at an event in New York City on August 15.

I don’t know if I’m in love with the idea of a jumbo-sized tablet. 10" devices seem to be about the right size—not too big or unwieldy, but not too small or cramped. That said, 2560×1600 across an 11.8" panel should be a sight to behold, and I’m looking forward to gawking at it.

Comments closed
    • rechicero
    • 7 years ago

    Something like this, at 4:3 ratio, would be the perfect comic book ereader… The “silver” ratio would be optimal, 1:square root of 2, or 1:1,412.

    • xeridea
    • 7 years ago

    Its sad that tablets are getting high resolution screens, and laptop screens have to suck so bad.

      • Farting Bob
      • 7 years ago

      I just want a desktop monitor that has a DPI as high as this 11″ tablet without spending a grand.

    • moog
    • 7 years ago

    I don’t understand your enthusiasm, a nice Samsung HDTV is easier to gawk at. Nobody really gawks at tablets, it’s more like fascination, but not gawking.

    • khands
    • 7 years ago

    I’ve really wanted a paper sized tablet for a while now and this sounds like it could be it 🙂

    • ikjadoon
    • 7 years ago

    While we’re on the topic:

    For Windows people, how can you avoid exorbitant resolutions sucking at productivity? I have 1920×1080 on 16″ and it’s ridiculous.

    Increasing the DPI makes everything comically large, but text remains tiny. And, some programs, whole chunks of text are cut-off (iTunes…cough!) when I increase the DPI.

      • Duck
      • 7 years ago

      Yes it’s stupid. 1920×1080 on 23″ is the absolute limit for me. Even then I end up squinting sometimes, enlarging text size when I can.

      DPI settings degrade the quality. If that’s the solution to the problem in Windows 8, then it’s not good enough. The best solution is to be able to run apps at 1/4 the resolution (1 pixel being mapped to 4 physical pixels on the screen). That way you get lossless scaling.

    • GeorgeMichael
    • 7 years ago

    I’m interested to see how the Windows 9 version is going to look. Hopefully Samsung will add keyboard mount for fast easy typing.

    • anotherengineer
    • 7 years ago

    If it’s 8-bit colour and PLS panel it would make for a pretty digital photo frame.

    • brucethemoose
    • 7 years ago

    Now, when will we see this screen in a Windows laptop?

    If only they would cram this LCD and a bigger battery into a W110ER…

      • internetsandman
      • 7 years ago

      You mean people aren’t satisfied with 1366×768? Preposterous! Besides, that would cost too much, cutting into our big corporate margins, and then as soon as you give the people what they want they won’t be satisfied, next thing you know they’ll want us to start paying taxes! Frankly I won’t stand for such nonsense!!

    • Flatland_Spider
    • 7 years ago

    Interesting. Too bad it’s from Samsung. I’m not buying anything Android that isn’t Google branded after the lackluster service and software quality of my Captivate. I fell for that siren song one time. Never again.

    • yogibbear
    • 7 years ago

    My first TFT screen was 11″….. it didn’t fit in my pocket either.

    • TEAMSWITCHER
    • 7 years ago

    It doesn’t matter. Developers are abandoning the Android platforms at an alarming rate. Too much piracy and fragmentation make it impossible to recover development costs. It’s not even worth porting iOS apps over. The screen is a pointless feature, apps will always be the problem.

      • jackbomb
      • 7 years ago

      Are you Tony Swash?

    • BoBzeBuilder
    • 7 years ago

    Thank you Apple?

    • Silus
    • 7 years ago

    And here comes a new set of Apple lawsuits against Samsung. Not only MUST Samsung’s tablet be something other than a rectangle (unless Apple also has a patent for other geometric forms) with the least amount of “round edges”, but it should be purple and the PPI must be lowered to something much less than the new iPad! Obviously this is assuming that users can’t swipe to unlock or have disappearing scrollbars. If that still happens, then a slew of other lawsuits will follow!

      • ALiLPinkMonster
      • 7 years ago

      I’m surprised Apple hasn’t tried to patent the whole concept of a tablet.

        • yogibbear
        • 7 years ago

        Well you would have to pop a few to come up with that, so I’m sure they have tried.

      • Chrispy_
      • 7 years ago

      I wouldn’t be surprised if Apple has tried to patent a high-dpi display though.

      And if they haven’t tried to patent a high-dpi display, they’ve almost certainly filed patents for UI methods for rendering things on a high-dpi display.

      Excuse me whilst I hurl into a bucket .

    • Decelerate
    • 7 years ago

    Not saying who’s right or wrong (I don’t know, and as a consummer, I don’t really care), but this type of release might push Apple harder towards non-competitive suppliers.

    Will be interesting to see how Android will look/perform on such a high res.

      • kamikaziechameleon
      • 7 years ago

      apple doesn’t own much in the way of actual tech. Look at their patent collection and you’d think they invented the wheel but realistically most of what goes into anyone of their products is either public domain or owned by another company. Its literally the companies posture that has held competitors at bay for so long. If you follow ANY of the leading tech forums/blogs you’ll see 3rd party devs/suppliers and such putting out most all of the tech apple is pushing years in advance of its integration into one of their “proprietary” devices.

        • Decelerate
        • 7 years ago

        But Apple’s client-size orders are what makes those techs viable business-wise. I’m not saying Apple made high-dpi displays, I’m saying that if Apple asks Samsung to supply high-DPI displays, then they ipso-facto give Samsung the knowledge and manufacturing capacity to release their own high-DPI products.

        It’s in Apple’s (and any company in general) best interest to delay competition’s access to a competitive advantage and differentiating factor.

          • OneArmedScissor
          • 7 years ago

          Samsung can do that, anyways. That company is ginormous. It designs and builds everything from display panels to nuclear power plants. Apple has no “knowledge” to “give” to anyone.

            • Decelerate
            • 7 years ago

            Manufacturing capacity to build a nuclear power plant isn’t exactly the same as the one needed for display panels.

            I’m not saying that Samsung couldn’t have made this had Apple not been paying them, but I’m sure that they would have either: payed more per part or reach yields later (days, weeks, maybe months).

            Billion-dollar contracts and demand security can go a long way.

            • mno
            • 7 years ago

            If they really wanted to, they could have made them at the same cost. They were one of two suppliers for the iPad 3 display at launch, meaning they already had the capability to produce such panels, and they certainly could have come up with ways to use excess panels such as putting them in laptops and digital photo frames.

      • CasbahBoy
      • 7 years ago

      Apple isn’t manufacturing those displays themselves. By pushing the boundaries (and having the ability to invest in pushing them with a lower risk due to the uniquely high market share and prices commanded by their products) and demanding the production of higher resolution displays than anyone else demands, they are at the same time making it cheaper for others to use similarly high resolution displays. They invested more and pushed harder, and their reward for that is being first to market. I don’t for a moment believe they should be the only ones allowed to have a high resolution display or [any other distinguishing feature here]. Nor am I suggesting that you feel that way either 🙂

      If they want to keep economies of scale from being applied to their competitors, they had better start bringing manufacturing in-house.

      Edit: On further thought, I should be saying ‘high DPI’ above, not ‘high resolution’.

        • Flatland_Spider
        • 7 years ago

        They already lock up suppliers by paying for facilities, which gives them a lead, but the problem is none of the knowledge is unique. The manufacturers are able to produce the same things; they just don’t. As soon as the others see there is a market, they are going to ramp up production on their own products, and in-house manufacturing isn’t going to change that.

      • Silus
      • 7 years ago

      Really ? As a consumer you don’t care ?! You sir are the definition of a “sheep”…

        • Decelerate
        • 7 years ago

        I don’t care if Apple goes for another 3rd-party supplier who doesn’t make competitive products or stays with Samsung. How is that being a sheep?

          • Silus
          • 7 years ago

          Well, maybe you worded it wrong or I didn’t understood your point, but you started your sentence as “Not saying who’s right or wrong” followed by “as a consumer, I don’t really care”. That was why I called you a sheep, not because of the other 3rd party suppliers thing…

            • demani
            • 7 years ago

            But a consumer shouldn’t necessarily be involved in the minutiae of patent litigation if the result is that we have two companies competing very hard with each other, both producing better products because of the competition.

            • Silus
            • 7 years ago

            Directly involved ? Of course not! He/She couldn’t anyway, even if he/she wanted to…and patent wars do NOT result in companies competing very hard with each other and this case makes that painfully obvious. Apple doesn’t want to compete through new and better products. They want to ban Samsung products, because Samsung is taking away more profits from them…
            This if BAD for consumers that have their choice limited. And it’s especially bad when there’s a clear bias in the US to protect Apple, whatever they do…their patent system and office, that grants them, is especially incompetent and should be reformed. They don’t do their job of actually investigating prior art which, if it exists, is one of the things that will PREVENT a patent from being given.

            • Beelzebubba9
            • 7 years ago

            [quote=”Silus”<] Apple doesn't want to compete through new and better products. [/quote<] I love how nerds can say that with a straight face while willfully avoiding the fact that Apple has consistently made products that define then lead the market they compete in. There still isn't a proper iPad 3 killer months after its launch, the rMBP is in a class of its own, and only the Zenbook Prime stands out among the MacBook Air clones. I don't know what planet you exist on where Apple isn't competing aggressively through what they sell. but but but APPLE DOESN'T COMPETE WITH PRODUCTS ONLY LITIGATION RIGHT?!?!

      • ImSpartacus
      • 7 years ago

      It will likely look no different than a 1280×800 interface. Isn’t that the whole point of this quad res trend?

        • Decelerate
        • 7 years ago

        That’s what it’s [i<]supposed[/i<] to look like, albeit crisper/sharper. Depends on whether the interface(s) is(are) adapted.

          • ImSpartacus
          • 7 years ago

          Oh, you’re suspect of Android’s hiDPI support? Your suspicions are probably on the mark. I bet it’s pretty janky. Even if Sammy hacks together a passable experience on this first gen product, I probably would still not consider it. Pixels are awesome, but I want to be able to use the device.

        • BobbinThreadbare
        • 7 years ago

        Android doesn’t have a single resolution it works on. It scales all the way down to 320×200 I believe.

          • ImSpartacus
          • 7 years ago

          Of course, but wouldn’t it be convienent if the 11.8″ device used a 1280×800-sized interface? Admittedly, everything would be larger than on a more common 10.1″ device, but it would be passable.

          And if they did that, then they could play the same hiDPI game that Apple played with the iPad. Sammy is always copying Apple, eh?

            • trackerben
            • 7 years ago

            Samsung says they separately evolved similar designs, i.e. parallel evolution. Apple says they originated the design which Samsung just copied later. Analyzing only from the impacts of what shipped how and when, and ignoring the secret whys of product development, you are likely correct.

            [url<]http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-19022935[/url<] Samsung and Apple's patent clash heads to trial by jury

            • ImSpartacus
            • 7 years ago

            The lawyers might say that, but we both know it’s not the case.

            Apple released the iPhone 4 with a hiDPI display and turned the display industry upside down. This did not (and [i<]could[/i<] not) happen overnight, but it started everyone (including Samsung) down that road. If Sammy's lawyers want to say that there was 'parallel evolution' starting from the iPhone 4 release, then I can agree with them. That started the hiDPI arms race and every company is doing it their own way. e.g. Motorola liked to cheat with the horrendous RGBW displays in their phones that gave pentile a bad name. ASUS went for a non-quad intermediate step with their 1080p UX*1A ultrabooks so they could beat the Retina MBAs to the market. Samsung instead likes to use RGBG matrixes to get enough logical pixels into their AMOLED displays so they can stick with 'even' resolutions like 480p and 720p (e.g. not qHD) in phones and small tablets. WP7 used a flat interface with sharp corners so they could stick with RGB 800x480 for as long as possible. It goes on and on. Everybody is doing it differently, but they are all 'doing it' because of the iPhone 4.

    • Star Brood
    • 7 years ago

    My 30″ monitor called, wants its resolution back.

      • Mourmain
      • 7 years ago

      1366×768 should be enough for everyone.

      • lilbuddhaman
      • 7 years ago

      My 27″ and 24″ monitors are in a corner, crying pixelated tears…

      • ALiLPinkMonster
      • 7 years ago

      Tell it to man up and get an even higher one.

        • Decelerate
        • 7 years ago

        I drool at the idea of a 4096×3072 or 5120×3200 30″ display!

          • ALiLPinkMonster
          • 7 years ago

          I have a feeling they’re not too far off. Wouldn’t be surprised if they come with the next generation of graphics chips.

            • Decelerate
            • 7 years ago

            I don’t think we’ll see them until a silver model with a bitten-off Apple logo on its back appears for 1500-2000$ and yet flies off the shelves.

            We’ve been short-changed in resolution/dpi for so damn long. If Apple didn’t force the industry with the iPad (not sure about mobile), and more significantly with the Macbook Pro, we’d still be seeing “1080p!!” on stickers for the next foreseable(sp?) future.

            Heck, you think Samsung (or anyone else for that matter) would release a 11.8″ tablet with 2560×1600 if the iPad 3 didn’t have the spec it has?

          • internetsandman
          • 7 years ago

          With any luck, Apple will release an iMac in a few months with a 5120×2880 27″ screen, if the retina rumours are to be believed

          • continuum
          • 7 years ago

          As do I!!

          But 11.8″ with 2560×1600 is definitely a step in the right direction!!

    • jdaven
    • 7 years ago

    A true worthy competitor putting tons of pressure on Apple. These guys are fighting it out in the courtroom, the storefronts, online retailers and the supply chains. After the dust settles when these two are done fighting, you are going to see companies like MS beaten to a pulp in the corner just from the splash damage.

      • blastdoor
      • 7 years ago

      And don’t forget Google (in the corner, I mean). How much longer before Samsung decides that they don’t need Google, and create a Samsung-only Android fork?

        • Mourmain
        • 7 years ago

        They tried that. They called it Bada. Once Android took off like a rocket, they realised that Bada didn’t make much sense for them, and more-or-less abandoned it in idle-engines hell.

        It wasn’t a fork off Android, but a fork off Android wouldn’t make sense at all. Samsung have mediocre developers. Google have the best in the world.

          • blastdoor
          • 7 years ago

          A fork off Android is a radically different thing from Bada.

          With a fork off Android (let’s call it Samdroid), Samsung could maintain compatibility with all existing Android apps while adding stuff to Samdroid that is Samdroid specific, so that future apps targeting Samdroid aren’t compatible with mainline Android. Since Samsung has the overwhelming majority of the Android market, developers would likely flock to Samdroid. Particularly if Samsung provided a better app store and protection against piracy than Google does (low bar).

          Samsung has the money needed to hire better software developers.

          Perhaps the biggest obstacle for Samsung is a lack of management experience with taking on responsibility for an OS/platform. But then again, they only need to do better than Google in order for this to be a good move, and Google hasn’t been very good at running an OS platform either.

        • poulpy
        • 7 years ago

        As long as they have a good relationship with Google and get early access to the next release to add layers of services/apps/skins/<random-junk> I don’t think they have much to gain to fork Android altogether.

        You just have to look at Amazon who did so and their fork is still based off Android 2.3.1, from late 2010, while in the meantime these versions passed by:
        2.3.3 – February 9, 2011
        2.3.4 – April 28, 2011
        2.3.5 – July 25, 2011
        2.3.6 – September 2, 2011
        2.3.7 – September 21, 2011
        4.0.1 – October 19, 2011
        4.0.2 – November 28, 2011
        4.0.3 – December 16, 2011
        4.1.1 – March 29, 2012

        That’s why IMO the Nexus phones and tablets are so appealing: vanilla up to date Android!

          • blastdoor
          • 7 years ago

          Having control of the OS is clearly advantageous as it locks out competitors. Just ask Apple.

        • Flatland_Spider
        • 7 years ago

        They’re not going to. The division of labor works too well for them. Google does the heavy code lifting, and Samsung does the heavy hardware lifting. It’s the same symbiotic relationship MS and Intel have, and it propelled both to great heights. Really Android is the Windows of the handset world.

        As for Motorola, Google has a habit of letting fruit rot on the vine if they don’t trash it out right. Based on their more recent performances of buying firms for the talent then rolling them into current divisions, Motorola is going to become Google Android Engineering Services, and they will work with OEMs to bring Android products and accessories to market. It’s in Google’s best interest to foster a community around Android, and offering fledgling firms engineering resources for cheap would be a big advantage and a marketing coup.

      • Flatland_Spider
      • 7 years ago

      I wouldn’t call Samsung a worthy competitor. That implies the two are equally matched, and Samsung has clear deficiency when it comes to understanding what people expect from software.

        • internetsandman
        • 7 years ago

        Yeah, but keep in mind that Microsoft has a clear deficiency in understanding what people want at all.

        • gamerguy76
        • 7 years ago

        Not sure why you got down voted. Have people used a samsung smart tv? I have one, and lets just say the tv isn’t very smart. Slow, buggy, and samsung doesn’t seem to care about fixing anything. If this is samsung future software, count me out.

      • trackerben
      • 7 years ago

      A worthy competitor yes. I buy their electronics all the time, and their divisions recruit some great design engineering teams.

      But I wouldn’t say they are a “true” competitor in the sense that Samsung is an examplar of a private-sector champion. Samsung was and in many ways still is a creature of the sacrosanct chaebol, government-favored, -financed, and -supported industrial conglomerates. The number of industrial deals its conglomerate arms were privileged with in the old days is legendary. Samsung governance and management were exposed by its own renowned legal counsel to be the” most corrupt in Asia.”

      [url<]http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2010/05/19/samsung-whistleblower-returns-to-the-public-eye/[/url<] The man who led Samsung Electronics and the rest of South Korea’s largest conglomerate for 21 years, Lee Kun-hee, is back in the public eye after again becoming chairman of the technology giant two months ago. But so is the corporate whistleblower whose accusations led to Mr. Lee’s resignation and tax fraud conviction in 2008.... [url<]http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/26/technology/26samsung.html?pagewanted=all[/url<] ...Mr. Lee was charged with tax evasion and breach of trust in April 2008 and convicted on both charges in what became known as the Samsung slush fund scandal. But he avoided prison and eventually received a presidential pardon and returned to the chairmanship of Samsung..." Knowledgeable observers are not at all surprised by Samsung's behavior in "spreading the money" by illegally "incentivizing" customer, supplier, media, legal, and even political relationships in a broad effort to advance its global aims. Apple has a tough fight ahead if it plans to fight too honorably.

        • jdaven
        • 7 years ago

        Very interesting post. +1

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This