Samsung Galaxy NOTE 10.1 hands on

UPDATE: I had to take the videos down for the moment at Samsung's request. There is information that they are about to change some design features and specs, but I don't know when and what exactly. I'm sorry for the situation, but I assure you I'll post them back as soon as I get word of it! Thank you for your interest and patience

I've had the chance to play around with the Note 10.1, that's the tablet with the S Pen. The reason they've delayed the release is that they've changed it dramatically since the preview at the MWC. It now has a 1.4GHz quadcore processor (I think it's the Exynos on the SIII), a 5 MP camera (instead of the 3.15) and the back got a hyperglazed finish just as the SIII. I've had the pebble blue one and I'm not sure if there is a marble white one.

The S Pen is much bigger than the Note 5.3 (looks EXACTLY the same), but smaller than the model shown at the MWC and it now fits inside a vertical hole in the lower left side. An amazing software feature is the Photoshop Touch app which is brilliant (as you may see in my video).

Here are my videos:
Short hands on presentation: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eueOIjW5cIo
S Pen and Photoshop Touch review: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J0b0SRT_D74

It's an astonishing device, clearly stepping way higher in the high end line and it works like a charm. If you have questions feel free to ask, but unfortunately I no longer have it to do extra demos.

zooster said:

Even 1920x1080 are too low for a 10.1. To compete with ipad visual quality they can barely put this resolution into a 8.9, but for a 10.1... no way it's too low.
Omg, Samsung is fond of low ppi especially if fullRGB, yes it's cheaper to build but OMG!

Click to expand...

Click to collapse

BS.
1920x1080 is normal-sized monitor HD resolution, to say it's too low for a 10.1" screen is beyond ridiculous.

iPhone's "Retina" resolution is completely worthless on a useless 3.5", iPad's "Retina" display is overkill. The higher the resolution the better... up to a point.
Beyond that you are just paying a weight and power consumption (and also brightness in the case of the Ipad) penalty without getting your worth (the higher the resolutions the less your eye is able to see the difference).
Full HD resolution on a 10.1" would be ideal.

P.S. "Samsung is fond of low ppi"??
The Galaxy Tab 10.1's PPI is over 10% higher than the iPad2's.

Guys, can we please stop the debate over PPI and screens and crap and get back on topic? If you're so concerned, go watch a youtube video comparing the two or something, it's all subjective so who cares.

OP, your videos have been marked private, I didn't get to watch

I too am wondering about a release date and also, is the pen comfortable for long periods of writing? I was literally about to buy a TPT before seeing that this was announced. Now I'm excited :3

Well..as long as it doesn't cost me my firstborn child

zooster said:

Normal sized monitor is not meant to be used as close as a tablet.

Click to expand...

Click to collapse

Normal sized monitors are on average around 2/2.5 times larger than a tablet, measure the distance from your desktop or laptop monitor to your eyes and the distance at which you keep your tablet and tell me the latter is more than 2/2.5 times the former (and yours is smaller than the average 10.1" tablet too).

The closer a device is used the higher the ppi should be. For a smartphone pixels start beeing unnoticeable from 320-330ppi. Actually the best job is made by lg with 1280x720 on a 4.3" and 342ppi, higher than apple.

Click to expand...

Click to collapse

What use are high resolution displays if they are too small to do anything remotely productive on them in the first place??
What are you going to do on a puny "Retina" 3.5" display?? Image editing?? Browsing desktop websites?? Editing autocad files?? Spreadsheets??

The only smartphone around, today, which is truly useful and in many ways usable as a small portable "computer" is the Galaxy Note. Talking about slight variances in PPI as if those other tiny displays were actually usable doing things where PPI matters is ludicrous..

The tablet is meant to be used less close than a phone, so the ppi can be lower, around 250... the value adopted by apple in ipad3.
So for an optimal view the ppi has to be higher. 1280x800 on a 10.1 does mean a too low ppi (maybe not for a monitor, but surely for a tablet).

Click to expand...

Click to collapse

Of course the display of the New iPad is way better than a 1280x800 10.1" Android tablet, your original point was that the New Ipad "Retina" display was way better than a full HD 10.1" Android tablet too which is what I called BS.
Ipad 3's PPI is 264, an HD 10.1" (which BTW would be 1980x1200 and not 1980x1020 like you said since most Android tablets are 16:10) like the announced Transformer Infinity will be 224.

So I repeat: saying (like you did) that a 224 PPI tablet display is "too low and can't compete with the visual quality" of a 264 PPI tablet display in the same size class is beyond ridiculous.

And yes, I confirm that samsung is fond of low ppi devices. You tell me the higest ppi of a fullRGB display of a Samsung device.

Click to expand...

Click to collapse

First HD tablet has been the iPad3, a couple of months ago, and other HD displays on 10" tablets are just NOW being announced.
So, where are you seeing all these HD tablets??

As I told you, up until the New iPad a couple of months back, Apple had the lowest PPI one in its size class (and comparing low PPIs, unlike the high PPIs comparisons you were making, differences ARE noticeable).

FullRGB only, because the pentile matrix trash doesn't worth any talk, you know that at ppi being equal the visual quality of a pentile is much lower due to less subpixels, so i.e. the actual ppi of a 300ppi samoled hd is around 250, but this is something already well known.

Click to expand...

Click to collapse

The "trash" SuperAMOLED HD 5.3" display of my Note is the very reason I bought it and it's why I can see NO real alternative to it today.
It's not perfect by any means but it's BY FAR the OVERALL best display around and it's what makes the Note actually useful and a pleasure to use.

I fell in love with AMOLED displays with my Galaxy S and have had only AMOLED displays since, going from the S to the SII and then to the Note as soon as it was available in Europe.
"Trash" is what I call all the other displays, thank you.

These stupid slight differences in comparable PPIs which you are raving over are totally MEANINGLESS when get those slightly higher PPIs on, for example, minuscule 3.5" iPhone displays which you can't really do anything on or when you consider that you pay the overkill iPad3 PPI by getting one of the heavier (if not THE heaviest) tablet around (and monster power consumption, overheating problems and a hit in brightness to boot).

zooster said:

It's not me, it's the human eye, just read indepentend scientific and academic articles mybe you can learn something about the visual acuity.

Click to expand...

Click to collapse

Since more than half of the human population needs corrective lenses this entire topic is comical. Most of us couldn't tell the difference between 240 dpi and a Galaxy if our life depended on it. If you can do so consider yourself lucky. And young. Give time a chance and you'll be in the same boat as the rest of us.

Spewing a bunch of scientific facts about acuity that only applies to a miniscule piece of the population makes for a weak argument.

For the vast majority of people that buy into retina hype they've wasted money for no reason. I admit it's a terrific marketing ploy for the iPad 3 which doesn't improve much over the iPad2. It works for Apple. That's what they do best: marketing.

If you notice a difference then buy an iPad. The rest of us will look at something that looks the same and not sweat the scientific facts.

Some day in the future Apple will add a second speaker to the iPad and proclaim they invented stereo. Until they do, I'd never consider an iPad. I consider stereo infinitely more important than a retina display.