CES question for the Guru's here... [Archive] - Audio & Video Forums

PDA

View Full Version : CES question for the Guru's here...



Worf101
01-05-2011, 05:13 AM
If 2010 was the year 3D came home, what's the big expected trend THIS year? I don't know so's ah'm a askin'.

Worf

Smokey
01-05-2011, 05:28 AM
How about HDTV LCD with ultrawidescreen 21:9 aspect ratio and 2560 x 1080 resolution from Vizio. Not sure if 3D or not.

http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2011/01/vizio-cinema-display-top-2.jpg

http://www.engadget.com/2011/01/04/vizio-bringing-21-9-cinema-hdtv-to-ces-with-2560-x-1080-resoluti/

frahengeo
01-05-2011, 06:10 AM
If 2010 was the year 3D came home, what's the big expected trend THIS year? I don't know so's ah'm a askin'.

Worf

How about a competing format for the current 3D technology.

This tech will utilize polarized glasses (like in the theater) and the left/right eye filter will be built into the TV instead of the glasses. Gotta love it when they do this.

atomicAdam
01-05-2011, 07:44 AM
How about going out side and see reality?

GMichael
01-05-2011, 08:14 AM
Holodecks. Nothing else is worth upgrading too. Imagine all the aps that will become available for that.

atomicAdam
01-05-2011, 10:11 AM
Holodecks. Nothing else is worth upgrading too. Imagine all the aps that will become available for that.

Ok - I can agree with this.

basite
01-05-2011, 10:18 AM
How about HDTV LCD with ultrawidescreen 21:9 aspect ratio and 2560 x 1080 resolution from Vizio. Not sure if 3D or not.

http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2011/01/vizio-cinema-display-top-2.jpg

http://www.engadget.com/2011/01/04/vizio-bringing-21-9-cinema-hdtv-to-ces-with-2560-x-1080-resoluti/


philips is doing that already, for about a year, maybe slightly longer...

It's got one big problem though: not all movies are released in the 2.35/1 (cinema) ratio. And, no tv/video is in this ratio. those are 4/3 or 16/9, it'll be hard to stretch that out, and you'll lose alot of screen if you cut it.

Philips did it, or at least, tried, and IMHO, they failed miserably. Their screens were computers, realigning pretty much everything, including things that didn't have to be redone anyhow. Results were doubtful to say at most. low FPS and shocks at some times, weird contrast, and everything looked like it was rendered to look like a 1990's computer game. Depth of field was WAY off, I saw Avatar on one of these screens, in multiple shops, including at my dealer (who seriously disliked it too), there is a scene there where he flies on his "bird/monster"/whatever they call it, filmed from above, with a seriously deep canyon below it. The background looked like a cheap "horizon" from a B movie, or an old computer game, with a GIF set at the end of the map, and the bird thing, looked like it was taken from thunderbirds (including the strings). It seemed like they had their "vision" on movies, and tried to do everything "better" than the movie makers. Unfortunately, they didn't even come close anything acceptable.

anyway, let's hope vizio does it better...

apart from that, I hope 3D will evolve to a "finished" product...

Keep them spinning,
Bert.

bobsticks
01-05-2011, 10:27 AM
Hey Bert, thanks for the info. I keep forgetting that Philips' homebase is over there in your neck of the woods.

I tend to share your and GM's view...we've come pretty far with the tech; maybe now would be a great time to perfect existing technologies and make them truly affordable to the masses. An industry-wide recognition that after dumbing-down the audience with lowgrade downloads and flash players a reaffirmation of quality media is the only thing that is going to push product in the short and midruns. I suspect that in trying times most folks view stopgaps and mediocre "advances" as superfluous.

Hope that beaut of a Lenko is still treatiung you well. Keep 'em spinning brother...

Peace,

sticks

Woochifer
01-05-2011, 12:04 PM
How about a competing format for the current 3D technology.

This tech will utilize polarized glasses (like in the theater) and the left/right eye filter will be built into the TV instead of the glasses. Gotta love it when they do this.

This isn't a competing format, given that it uses the same MPEG-4 3D extension that underlies Blu-ray 3D and 3D HD broadcasts. It's basically a cheaper version that doesn't require time synced shutter glasses.

Woochifer
01-05-2011, 12:19 PM
If 2010 was the year 3D came home, what's the big expected trend THIS year? I don't know so's ah'm a askin'.

Worf

The big rollout will be tablets and more tablets to compete with the iPad. Ever since the iPad came out, I've thought that tablets were potentially the long-elusive device that finally makes home theater network convergence a reality. Previous efforts at convergence have failed because they don't acknowledge that TV is a "lean back" activity while web surfing is a "lean forward" activity. The tablet is an ideal form factor for bridging TV and network activities together.

Already, we've seen some remote control apps on the iPad, and I see a lot more activity in this space as developers figure out how to seamlessly integrate all the parts together.

On the home theater front, it was supposed to be the big rollout for Google TV, but glitches with the software and lack of programming for the platform have put the damper on that party. Earlier discussion linked below.

http://forums.audioreview.com/showthread.php?t=35773

frahengeo
01-05-2011, 04:28 PM
This isn't a competing format, given that it uses the same MPEG-4 3D extension that underlies Blu-ray 3D and 3D HD broadcasts. It's basically a cheaper version that doesn't require time synced shutter glasses.

Agree. Poor choice of word. Just an alternate hardware implementation for the same software. Still, the change makes me a little gun shy in purchasing 3D Tech.

Ajani
01-05-2011, 05:59 PM
The big rollout will be tablets and more tablets to compete with the iPad. Ever since the iPad came out, I've thought that tablets were potentially the long-elusive device that finally makes home theater network convergence a reality. Previous efforts at convergence have failed because they don't acknowledge that TV is a "lean back" activity while web surfing is a "lean forward" activity. The tablet is an ideal form factor for bridging TV and network activities together.

Agreed... Tablets are the clear trend at this years CES... We've already seen a load of Android (Honeycomb) models announced from major players...

Speaking of the missing link:

I have to give props to Visio for including Infrared on both its smartphone and tablet... Meaning they can both be used easily as universal remotes...

eisforelectronic
01-05-2011, 07:11 PM
I usually try to limit my CES trips to every other year. I've found the normal trend to be breaking technology every 2-3 years with the between years expanding on whatever the big deal was.

Smokey
01-06-2011, 05:19 AM
It's got one big problem though: not all movies are released in the 2.35/1 (cinema) ratio. And, no tv/video is in this ratio. those are 4/3 or 16/9, it'll be hard to stretch that out, and you'll lose alot of screen if you cut it.

This also beg the question as are there any video components that can output 21:9 native resolution. I mean even with 2.35/1 ratio movies, wouldn't the bluray player output still have native 16:9 ratio which mean there still be black bars above and below screen.

pixelthis
01-06-2011, 12:54 PM
If 2010 was the year 3D came home, what's the big expected trend THIS year? I don't know so's ah'm a askin'.

Worf

THE 3D was last year. THE goal for 2011 is to actually sell some 3D.
With most sets north of three grand, and the price of a weeks worth of groceries
getting there, most have decided that they can pass on the headache inducing tech.
L.G has come out with lighter glasses, and a new way of displaying 3D that involves cutting
the rez in half for some reason. And passive glasses.
AND TALKYS favorite company, VIZIO is coming out with a 3D model, thats right, one
model, a 65" incher, just to be in the game.
It will crash and burn of course. What 3D I have seen is not worth the trouble, just a toy for
people with too much money and too little sense.:1:

Woochifer
01-06-2011, 01:03 PM
This also beg the question as are there any video components that can output 21:9 native resolution. I mean even with 2.35/1 ratio movies, wouldn't the bluray player output still have native 16:9 ratio which mean there still be black bars above and below screen.

There's a whole category of home theater installations that utilize a constant height 2.35:1 aspect ratio. That involves zooming the image to fill the full screen and eliminate the letterboxing. Anything projected onto the screen using the full 16:9 image area gets pillarboxed with curtains.

But, as far as the native format goes, there's no question to beg. The pixel grid for all HDTV formats is fixed at 16:9.

Woochifer
01-06-2011, 04:13 PM
Agree. Poor choice of word. Just an alternate hardware implementation for the same software. Still, the change makes me a little gun shy in purchasing 3D Tech.

Doesn't matter because over the next few years, 3D will just become a standard feature with HDTVs. It's already built into the latest video processing chips, since it's basically an extension to the existing MPEG-4 format -- no new royalties or complicated implementations needed. Whether it uses passive, active, or lenticular approaches, if you buy a TV, it will simply come with the 3D feature. Not much different than how HD is now standard issue with nearly all TVs.

Woochifer
01-06-2011, 06:19 PM
Agreed... Tablets are the clear trend at this years CES... We've already seen a load of Android (Honeycomb) models announced from major players...

Interesting piece by Horace Dediu of Asymco (excellent site for insightful analysis of the tech market). He feels that this year's CES is the most exciting one ever because the announcements so far point to two "unthinkable" events unfolding:


1. The abandonment of Windows exclusivity by practically all of Microsoft’s OEM customers.

2. The abandonment of Intel exclusivity by Microsoft for the next generation of Windows.

http://www.asymco.com/2011/01/06/this-is-the-most-exciting-ces-ever/

On point #1, the article indicates that the flood of tablet announcements at CES include most of Microsoft's biggest OEM customers, and most of the announced tablets won't use Windows. This would have been unthinkable a few years ago.

And on point #2, the article discusses MS' announcement that they would produce a version of Windows for ARM processors, which dominate in mobile devices. (Windows Mobile and Windows Phone 7 don't count, because they're based on an entirely different code base from desktop Windows) Again, MS looking to support Windows with a non-Intel architecture also would have been unthinkable a few years back.

Despite the dearth of exciting stuff on the home theater front, some major shifts appear underway on the computing front. And all of this without any official presence from Apple at CES.

Smokey
01-06-2011, 09:42 PM
There's a whole category of home theater installations that utilize a constant height 2.35:1 aspect ratio. That involves zooming the image to fill the full screen and eliminate the letterboxing.

Thanks Wooch

So what you are saying is in order to show 2.35:1 aspect ratio material in its native format without zooming, the projector have to be able to project such a aspect ratio on a screen.

But outside film projection systems, are there any other video systems that can output native 2.35:1 aspect ratio without letter boxing?

Woochifer
01-07-2011, 08:22 AM
Thanks Wooch

So what you are saying is in order to show 2.35:1 aspect ratio material in its native format without zooming, the projector have to be able to project such a aspect ratio on a screen.

No, what I'm saying is that for home users, there is no such thing as a "native format" for 2.35:1 aspect ratio. That Vizio TV must zoom or stretch the original image to fit that aspect ratio. IMO, that's a gimmick and I don't think Philips did very well either when they introduced their extra widescreen TVs more than a year ago.

The constant height theater systems zoom the image to fit the full width of the screen. Displaying something in a native 1.78:1 aspect ratio would project the full image onto the same height screen, but close the curtains on the sides.


But outside film projection systems, are there any other video systems that can output native 2.35:1 aspect ratio without letter boxing?

No. But, why is eliminating the letterboxing such a issue in the first place? The 16:9 aspect ratio is the standard for home theater use, and there's no getting around that without zooming or stretching the image.

tube fan
01-12-2011, 08:58 PM
what's in: analogue, tubes, and lot's of love!

Ajani
01-13-2011, 04:14 AM
Interesting piece by Horace Dediu of Asymco (excellent site for insightful analysis of the tech market). He feels that this year's CES is the most exciting one ever because the announcements so far point to two "unthinkable" events unfolding:



http://www.asymco.com/2011/01/06/this-is-the-most-exciting-ces-ever/

On point #1, the article indicates that the flood of tablet announcements at CES include most of Microsoft's biggest OEM customers, and most of the announced tablets won't use Windows. This would have been unthinkable a few years ago.

And on point #2, the article discusses MS' announcement that they would produce a version of Windows for ARM processors, which dominate in mobile devices. (Windows Mobile and Windows Phone 7 don't count, because they're based on an entirely different code base from desktop Windows) Again, MS looking to support Windows with a non-Intel architecture also would have been unthinkable a few years back.

Despite the dearth of exciting stuff on the home theater front, some major shifts appear underway on the computing front. And all of this without any official presence from Apple at CES.

The end of Microsoft as the "software king" is a topic my brother (tech junkie) and I have been discussing and following for a few, probably around 2 :), years... With the move towards smartphones and tablets and away from laptops and desktops, it does spell trouble for Microsoft... Considering that 1) Microsoft is far behind in the phone/tablet market 2) Android is basically taking Microsoft's approach of being available on just about any hardware, as seen in your 1st point (except that Android customers seem to be a lot happier with their OS than most of us are with Windows) 3) Though most persons use Windows on their home/work machines, only a relatively small group are really windows fans - many would switch if a good and affordable alternative was available - Apple being too expensive and Linux just not user friendly - but on smartphones and tablets; Apple is affordable and Android (Linux) is user friendly...

Microsoft is really going to need to reinvent themselves in order to be competitive in phones and tablets...

Woochifer
01-13-2011, 06:12 PM
The end of Microsoft as the "software king" is a topic my brother (tech junkie) and I have been discussing and following for a few, probably around 2 :), years... With the move towards smartphones and tablets and away from laptops and desktops, it does spell trouble for Microsoft... Considering that 1) Microsoft is far behind in the phone/tablet market 2) Android is basically taking Microsoft's approach of being available on just about any hardware, as seen in your 1st point (except that Android customers seem to be a lot happier with their OS than most of us are with Windows) 3) Though most persons use Windows on their home/work machines, only a relatively small group are really windows fans - many would switch if a good and affordable alternative was available - Apple being too expensive and Linux just not user friendly - but on smartphones and tablets; Apple is affordable and Android (Linux) is user friendly...

Microsoft is really going to need to reinvent themselves in order to be competitive in phones and tablets...

Yeah, a lot of the post mortems on CES have opined that the shifts occurring in the computing space are huge. I tend to concur. PCs will continue to have a large place in the market, but they no longer drive innovation and growth. They've become high volume commodities, with low margins. Not much different than low end appliances.

Tablets are not a new market, but with the iPad, they now comprise a rapidly growing segment. That's why the PC vendors are all jumping in as quickly as they can, even though the current version of Android is not built for tablets.

I totally hear you on Windows. I use a Windows PC at work, and an iMac at home. One computer I use because I have to, the other one I use because I want to. CEO Ballmer's still wedded to MS' 1990s "Windows Everywhere" strategy -- tie everything back to the desktop monopoly. It worked so long as the desktop PC dominated computing, and it did for the better part of a decade and a half. Ironically, this strategy is collapsing because they did not do enough to enable Windows to truly go everywhere.

With smartphones and tablets, MS is feeling the consequences of basically sitting on their laurels for much of the last decade. Slapped a resource intensive GUI that collapsed under its own weight (Vista) and subsequently released a cleaned up version that finally worked right (Windows 7). But, unlike with Apple's OS X and Linux, Windows is not well suited to scaling down for smaller devices. They did nothing to modernize Windows by making it scalable and less resource intensive.

That's why MS is scrambling to catch up with Windows Phone 7 and now with the just announced ARM-based Windows (which is still two years away at least, an eternity in the tech market). But, the problem is that those products are very late to market. Some of the MS lackeys in the tech press pointed out that Windows Phone 7 is further along than the original iPhone at introduction. Problem with this comparison is that the market is not comparing the new WP7 phones with the original iPhone. They're deciding between a feature-incomplete WP7 phone and the iPhone 4 (or 3GS).

Apple has had almost four years to build an entrenched ecosystem around the iOS devices. Consumers have already bought in. They have music, videos, apps, and accessories. All of the iOS devices can share all this. If you already own an iPod touch, and want to add an iPad. Just plug it in, and everything transfers over. This is what MS is fighting on both the phone and tablet fronts, and their desktop monopoly does nothing to lock consumers in with other computing devices.

Rumor is that Windows 8 will be radical break from previous versions. If they can create a truly scalable version of Windows, while supporting legacy PC applications with virtualization, then they might actually maintain their market position by actually innovating for a change.

basite
01-14-2011, 02:24 AM
what's in: analogue, tubes, and lot's of love!

amen to that :D

atomicAdam
01-14-2011, 06:21 AM
Yeah, a lot of the post mortems on CES have opined that the shifts occurring in the computing space are huge. I tend to concur. PCs will continue to have a large place in the market, but they no longer drive innovation and growth. They've become high volume commodities, with low margins. Not much different than low end appliances.

Tablets are not a new market, but with the iPad, they now comprise a rapidly growing segment. That's why the PC vendors are all jumping in as quickly as they can, even though the current version of Android is not built for tablets.

I totally hear you on Windows. I use a Windows PC at work, and an iMac at home. One computer I use because I have to, the other one I use because I want to. CEO Ballmer's still wedded to MS' 1990s "Windows Everywhere" strategy -- tie everything back to the desktop monopoly. It worked so long as the desktop PC dominated computing, and it did for the better part of a decade and a half. Ironically, this strategy is collapsing because they did not do enough to enable Windows to truly go everywhere.

With smartphones and tablets, MS is feeling the consequences of basically sitting on their laurels for much of the last decade. Slapped a resource intensive GUI that collapsed under its own weight (Vista) and subsequently released a cleaned up version that finally worked right (Windows 7). But, unlike with Apple's OS X and Linux, Windows is not well suited to scaling down for smaller devices. They did nothing to modernize Windows by making it scalable and less resource intensive.

That's why MS is scrambling to catch up with Windows Phone 7 and now with the just announced ARM-based Windows (which is still two years away at least, an eternity in the tech market). But, the problem is that those products are very late to market. Some of the MS lackeys in the tech press pointed out that Windows Phone 7 is further along than the original iPhone at introduction. Problem with this comparison is that the market is not comparing the new WP7 phones with the original iPhone. They're deciding between a feature-incomplete WP7 phone and the iPhone 4 (or 3GS).

Apple has had almost four years to build an entrenched ecosystem around the iOS devices. Consumers have already bought in. They have music, videos, apps, and accessories. All of the iOS devices can share all this. If you already own an iPod touch, and want to add an iPad. Just plug it in, and everything transfers over. This is what MS is fighting on both the phone and tablet fronts, and their desktop monopoly does nothing to lock consumers in with other computing devices.

Rumor is that Windows 8 will be radical break from previous versions. If they can create a truly scalable version of Windows, while supporting legacy PC applications with virtualization, then they might actually maintain their market position by actually innovating for a change.

I guess it turns out that people actually would prefer to be spoon fed their computer software. Big Brother Apple will make everything OK.

Ajani
01-14-2011, 06:46 AM
I guess it turns out that people actually would prefer to be spoon fed their computer software. Big Brother Apple will make everything OK.

Not all persons.... Some would rather use Google (Android) and have Microsoft style freedom with Linux quality...

But you do raise a good point. I only mentioned Apple being expensive, but the lack of freedom to do what you want is a turn off to many persons... It's why I'm more interested in upcoming Android Tablets (like the Motorola Xoom) than the iPad....

Woochifer
01-14-2011, 09:21 AM
I guess it turns out that people actually would prefer to be spoon fed their computer software. Big Brother Apple will make everything OK.

Consumers just want their computing devices to work with a minimum of fuss and frustration. They'd rather have their computing devices serve their needs than the other way around. A lot of techies and hackers seem to prefer it the other way around.

Feanor
01-14-2011, 09:28 AM
what's in: analogue {sic: British spelling}, tubes, and lot's of love!
Oh, puke. :crazy:

atomicAdam
01-14-2011, 09:30 AM
Consumers just want their computing devices to work with a minimum of fuss and frustration. They'd rather have their computing devices serve their needs than the other way around. A lot of techies and hackers seem to prefer it the other way around.

This is true I suppose - I certainly hate it when my Window phone craps out. But it more drops the signal randomly - not while on calls - but just going about - than anything else.

I've been eying an iPad for notes at up coming shows. Seems so much more simple than paper/pens/cheat sheets - if it only had a bomb camera on it that would take video. And if shows had floor wide wifi. .... hummm....

-adam

Ajani
01-14-2011, 09:49 AM
This is true I suppose - I certainly hate it when my Window phone craps out. But it more drops the signal randomly - not while on calls - but just going about - than anything else.

I've been eying an iPad for notes at up coming shows. Seems so much more simple than paper/pens/cheat sheets - if it only had a bomb camera on it that would take video. And if shows had floor wide wifi. .... hummm....

-adam

Which is why if an Apple tablet doesn't have all the features you need, you can look for Android...

However if an Apple product does all you want it to do, I'd probably stick with Apple...

pixelthis
01-14-2011, 12:10 PM
No. But, why is eliminating the letterboxing such a issue in the first place? The 16:9 aspect ratio is the standard for home theater use, and there's no getting around that without zooming or stretching the image.[/QUOTE]

ITS a HUGE issue for some, who just don't "get" letterboxing, don't understand it, and don't like it, especially older people. Its a constant complaint for most of the people I help.
My new LG has comprehensive aspect ratio controls, more than the usual zoom, wide,
and normal. I prefer the original aspect, and don't mind the bars, but its nice to be able to closely fit a pic on a screen with little picture loss if I want.
FYI, you can zoom a lot of 4:3 material with little loss of anything important, especially concerts. The same eye scanning pattern 16:9 was made for tends to put a lot of the
picture info in the middle of the screen without realizing it.:1:

Woochifer
01-14-2011, 01:21 PM
But you do raise a good point. I only mentioned Apple being expensive, but the lack of freedom to do what you want is a turn off to many persons... It's why I'm more interested in upcoming Android Tablets (like the Motorola Xoom) than the iPad....

I'm glad that you actually addressed this issue correctly. Much of the blathering I read about Android goes on and on about "freedom" primarily in the context of its roots as an "open" OS.

The thing to remember about Apple is that they don't follow the typical techie obsession with spec sheets and feature checklists. They'd rather leave a feature out than include a half-assed implementation just to add another line to a checklist. Fueling feature creep was Microsoft's MO (and probably still is). It got them kudos from jaded tech reviewers, but it also made their software ever more convoluted, illogical, resource-hogging, and buggy.

Whether you agree with him or not, Steve Jobs has in the past said that he's just as proud of what Apple chooses to leave out as what they include. In a way, that's a very important angle that they're playing in the consumer market. They focus on getting a limited set of features right (at least right in their view), than trying to shoehorn every conceivable feature into a device even if many of the implementations are mediocre.

With Android, I get the impression that they're heading down the same path as MS -- focus more on packing more stuff than getting all that stuff right before it goes out. And the "freedom" in that platform does not always benefit consumers, as evidenced by the lack of a consistent upgrade path across the entire platform (rooting and installing hacked firmware does not count), the increasing control exercised by carriers, and huge number of spyware apps that have been posted onto the Android Marketplace.

As far as Android tablets announced at CES, all but the Motorola Xoom will come with 2.2, the version that not even Google recommends using for tablets. This leaves a fair amount of uncertainty as to which Android tablets will support version 3.0 when it comes out later this year.

Ajani
01-14-2011, 01:46 PM
I'm glad that you actually addressed this issue correctly. Much of the blathering I read about Android goes on and on about "freedom" primarily in the context of its roots as an "open" OS.

The thing to remember about Apple is that they don't follow the typical techie obsession with spec sheets and feature checklists. They'd rather leave a feature out than include a half-assed implementation just to add another line to a checklist. Fueling feature creep was Microsoft's MO (and probably still is). It got them kudos from jaded tech reviewers, but it also made their software ever more convoluted, illogical, resource-hogging, and buggy.

Whether you agree with him or not, Steve Jobs has in the past said that he's just as proud of what Apple chooses to leave out as what they include. In a way, that's a very important angle that they're playing in the consumer market. They focus on getting a limited set of features right (at least right in their view), than trying to shoehorn every conceivable feature into a device even if many of the implementations are mediocre.

With Android, I get the impression that they're heading down the same path as MS -- focus more on packing more stuff than getting all that stuff right before it goes out. And the "freedom" in that platform does not always benefit consumers, as evidenced by the lack of a consistent upgrade path across the entire platform (rooting and installing hacked firmware does not count), the increasing control exercised by carriers, and huge number of spyware apps that have been posted onto the Android Marketplace.

As far as Android tablets announced at CES, all but the Motorola Xoom will come with 2.2, the version that not even Google recommends using for tablets. This leaves a fair amount of uncertainty as to which Android tablets will support version 3.0 when it comes out later this year.

We basically agree... Apple is about getting the features right: It just works...

Google is very much about more Microsoft style choices but with a much better underlying OS... Google is a competitor to both Microsoft and Apple as they are launching products with 'a bit' of the best of both worlds... Not quite as refined as Apple but also not as tightly controlled... While it is true that consumers just want a product to work, it also needs to do the basics you need... Apple sometimes leaves out what many consumers consider basics (cameras, flash support, etc in the case of the iPad)...

You are very much mistaken about the Motorola Xoom... The Xoom will be the first Android tablet to use version 3.0 'Honeycomb', which is why it is so special...

http://cnettv.cnet.com/motorola-xoom-best-show/9742-1_53-50098520.html?tag=contentMain;contentBody;2n

http://www.motorola.com/Consumers/US-EN/Consumer-Product-and-Services/Tablets/ci.MOTOROLA-XOOM-US-EN.overview

Some manufacturers (Samsung for example) opted to use the older Android phone OS' on their tablets as they wanted to rush out an iPad competitor, rather than wait on the tablet OS (honeycomb) to be released. That impatience will likely cost them in the long run when customers realize they're missing out on the real android tablet experience... scenarios like that is where Apple has a real advantage as they control both hard and software so no half-assed products can be released to market (unless they choose to release it)...

Feanor
01-14-2011, 03:16 PM
No. But, why is eliminating the letterboxing such a issue in the first place? The 16:9 aspect ratio is the standard for home theater use, and there's no getting around that without zooming or stretching the image.

ITS a HUGE issue for some, who just don't "get" letterboxing, don't understand it, and don't like it, especially older people. Its a constant complaint for most of the people I help.
My new LG has comprehensive aspect ratio controls, more than the usual zoom, wide,
and normal. I prefer the original aspect, and don't mind the bars, but its nice to be able to closely fit a pic on a screen with little picture loss if I want.
FYI, you can zoom a lot of 4:3 material with little loss of anything important, especially concerts. The same eye scanning pattern 16:9 was made for tends to put a lot of the
picture info in the middle of the screen without realizing it.:1:[/quote]
I've never understood why letterboxing is hard to understand or much of a problem: can you explain?

Woochifer
01-14-2011, 07:10 PM
We basically agree... Apple is about getting the features right: It just works...

Google is very much about more Microsoft style choices but with a much better underlying OS... Google is a competitor to both Microsoft and Apple as they are launching products with 'a bit' of the best of both worlds... Not quite as refined as Apple but also not as tightly controlled... While it is true that consumers just want a product to work, it also needs to do the basics you need... Apple sometimes leaves out what many consumers consider basics (cameras, flash support, etc in the case of the iPad)...

The tight control though has begun cutting both ways. Android might not require you to go through a particular app store and has more customization options available to the end user. But, the gatekeeper for the platform is the carrier, which means that they control whether any uninstallable crapware or GUI overlays get shipped with your phone, and the timing and availability of any Android OS updates.

In the case of the "missing" features on the iPad, that's something that a lot of tech reviewers zoomed in on. But, again they're coming at it from the perspective of spec sheets and checklists. They didn't bother to look at what the iPad got right as a 1.0 product. Some of the "missing" features got added via OS update, and the cameras are likely coming in a couple of months when the iPad 2 comes out.

As far as Flash goes, you're talking to someone who uses Flash blockers on every web browser. Blocking Flash has significantly sped up my web browsing and virtually eliminated the frequent crashes I experienced before (and this is with PC and Mac alike). The sooner we can relegate that POS to the dustbin of history, the better.

Which makes Google's announcement that they will drop support for H.264 (MPEG-4 AVC) in Chrome all the more suspect. They claim that going exclusively to the WebM codec is because it's "open" (note thought that Google owns IP for WebM), but they've effectively forced everybody using Chrome to also use Flash for H.264 video.

Basically, they're trying to move HTML5 towards the inferior WebM codec that has zero hardware support with current devices, and away from a higher performing codec that has 100% industry support and hardware support on hundreds of millions of devices. And if they're removing H.264 because it's not "open" then why are they keeping Flash, which is far more proprietary?


You are very much mistaken about the Motorola Xoom... The Xoom will be the first Android tablet to use version 3.0 'Honeycomb', which is why it is so special...

Actually, I did note that the Xoom was the lone exception.


Some manufacturers (Samsung for example) opted to use the older Android phone OS' on their tablets as they wanted to rush out an iPad competitor, rather than wait on the tablet OS (honeycomb) to be released. That impatience will likely cost them in the long run when customers realize they're missing out on the real android tablet experience... scenarios like that is where Apple has a real advantage as they control both hard and software so no half-assed products can be released to market (unless they choose to release it)...

This is indicative of the herd mentality that dominates consumer electronics. I'm more curious to see if HP (which owns WebOS) and RIM actually come up with an integrated tablet package that shows some innovation, rather than simply copying what Apple introduced last year.

The problem with competing with Apple on the tablet front is that they've already been working on this for many years, and the advantages they've built up in the market with the iPod and iPhone and iTunes have positioned them very well. Consider that Apple was working on the iPad years before the iPhone came out. They decided to shelve the tablet because the technology wasn't ready, but the original touch-based concepts were ready for smartphones, so the iPhone came out first.

The problem for companies making Android tablets is that they will have a very difficult time matching Apple on price. Unlike the Mac, which is premium priced, the iPad is competitively priced; and Apple still makes a lot on each unit, because their volume (the iPod touch, iPhone, and iPad share the same processor and other internal components) allows them to contract huge component quantities. We'll see what happens in March or April when the iPad 2 comes out. If they keep the original iPad in production and drop the price by $100, then it puts even more pressure on competing tablets that have higher production costs.

The smartphone market is where Android will remain very competitive, because the carriers are such huge player. You don't have that big third party driving the tablet market.

Ajani
01-14-2011, 07:47 PM
The tight control though has begun cutting both ways. Android might not require you to go through a particular app store and has more customization options available to the end user. But, the gatekeeper for the platform is the carrier, which means that they control whether any uninstallable crapware or GUI overlays get shipped with your phone, and the timing and availability of any Android OS updates.

In the case of the "missing" features on the iPad, that's something that a lot of tech reviewers zoomed in on. But, again they're coming at it from the perspective of spec sheets and checklists. They didn't bother to look at what the iPad got right as a 1.0 product. Some of the "missing" features got added via OS update, and the cameras are likely coming in a couple of months when the iPad 2 comes out.

As far as Flash goes, you're talking to someone who uses Flash blockers on every web browser. Blocking Flash has significantly sped up my web browsing and virtually eliminated the frequent crashes I experienced before (and this is with PC and Mac alike). The sooner we can relegate that POS to the dustbin of history, the better.

Which makes Google's announcement that they will drop support for H.264 (MPEG-4 AVC) in Chrome all the more suspect. They claim that going exclusively to the WebM codec is because it's "open" (note thought that Google owns IP for WebM), but they've effectively forced everybody using Chrome to also use Flash for H.264 video.

Basically, they're trying to move HTML5 towards the inferior WebM codec that has zero hardware support with current devices, and away from a higher performing codec that has 100% industry support and hardware support on hundreds of millions of devices. And if they're removing H.264 because it's not "open" then why are they keeping Flash, which is far more proprietary?



Actually, I did note that the Xoom was the lone exception.



This is indicative of the herd mentality that dominates consumer electronics. I'm more curious to see if HP (which owns WebOS) and RIM actually come up with an integrated tablet package that shows some innovation, rather than simply copying what Apple introduced last year.

The problem with competing with Apple on the tablet front is that they've already been working on this for many years, and the advantages they've built up in the market with the iPod and iPhone and iTunes have positioned them very well. Consider that Apple was working on the iPad years before the iPhone came out. They decided to shelve the tablet because the technology wasn't ready, but the original touch-based concepts were ready for smartphones, so the iPhone came out first.

The problem for companies making Android tablets is that they will have a very difficult time matching Apple on price. Unlike the Mac, which is premium priced, the iPad is competitively priced; and Apple still makes a lot on each unit, because their volume (the iPod touch, iPhone, and iPad share the same processor and other internal components) allows them to contract huge component quantities. We'll see what happens in March or April when the iPad 2 comes out. If they keep the original iPad in production and drop the price by $100, then it puts even more pressure on competing tablets that have higher production costs.

The smartphone market is where Android will remain very competitive, because the carriers are such huge player. You don't have that big third party driving the tablet market.

My bad on the Xoom, I need to get glasses....

As for the tablet wars... I just can't see Apple holding that down, for at least one reason: variety... As good as Apple products are (I certainly enjoyed my MacMini), not everyone is going to want an iPad, much like how not everyone wants an iPhone (one model just isn't enough to appeal to everyone - no matter how good that one model is)... Apple will continue to do very well, but with stronger and stronger competition from Motorola, HTC and even Samsung on the way (and many others), the shear variety will allow Android to overtake them eventually... However, it is possible that Apple will continue to outsell any individual hardware brands running Android... But collectively I expect Android to take the market...

Either way it's good for consumers... We need to have choices available... Something to ensure Apple stays competitive... IMO, the biggest problem Windows faced was the lack of competition; Apple was a premium product, so for the most part they weren't really competition... And Linux was for programmers and software junkies... So Microsoft was allowed to get lazier and lazier... I don't see Apple getting anywhere near as bad as Microsoft, but that doesn't mean they should get the opportunity...

Note: I agree that a lot of tech reviewers focus way too much on spec sheets (which is why some were shocked at how well the iPad sold)... Spec sheets don't matter to most users... in 1994, I used to analyze the specs of any computer I planned to buy... Now I just walk into a store and pick up the cheapest laptop from a brand I know (as I'm sure it will run any basic application I plan to use on it)... However, if you have specific needs then features will matter... Suppose you really want to use a tablet to write shorthand notes or draw, so you need a stylus? Or You need a camera? Or, unlike you, the person views many sites that run flash (though flash is awful)? Then an iPad just won't meet that persons needs... so they'd have to look elsewhere... One device just can't appeal to all users...

Mash
01-15-2011, 07:00 AM
Never underestimate Apple. Their creativity and persistance remain strong. But Apple did stumble after Jobs was forced out, and until his return, because certain people with corporate mentalities did not fathom Jobs' contribution to Apple's creative drive.

Google may simply wish to gain more control of their market.... for greater pricing power. Think the old ATT. I am glad that Google's motto is "Do no Evil".

Mash
01-15-2011, 07:02 AM
Apple's creativity and persistance remain strong. But Apple did stumble after Jobs was forced out, and until his return, because certain people with corporate mentalities did not fathom Jobs' contribution to Apple's creative drive.

Google may simply wish to gain more control of their market.... for greater pricing power. Think the old ATT. I am glad that Google's motto is "Do no Evil".

Woochifer
01-17-2011, 02:29 PM
My bad on the Xoom, I need to get glasses....

3D?


As for the tablet wars... I just can't see Apple holding that down, for at least one reason: variety... As good as Apple products are (I certainly enjoyed my MacMini), not everyone is going to want an iPad, much like how not everyone wants an iPhone (one model just isn't enough to appeal to everyone - no matter how good that one model is)... Apple will continue to do very well, but with stronger and stronger competition from Motorola, HTC and even Samsung on the way (and many others), the shear variety will allow Android to overtake them eventually... However, it is possible that Apple will continue to outsell any individual hardware brands running Android... But collectively I expect Android to take the market...

Either way it's good for consumers... We need to have choices available... Something to ensure Apple stays competitive... IMO, the biggest problem Windows faced was the lack of competition; Apple was a premium product, so for the most part they weren't really competition... And Linux was for programmers and software junkies... So Microsoft was allowed to get lazier and lazier... I don't see Apple getting anywhere near as bad as Microsoft, but that doesn't mean they should get the opportunity...

There are two ways of interpreting how the tablet market will play out -- by looking at how the smartphone market has evolved, and how the MP3 player market has already played out.

With smartphones, you have a situation where Android has begun consolidating the market share formerly shared between Microsoft, RIM, and Nokia, and has now positioned itself to become the overall market leader. Apple actually hasn't been impacted because its growth continues to track with the overall market. The thing about the smartphone market though is that you have the carriers as a third party gatekeeper. In the US, iPhones were only available on AT&T's network, which automatically puts a cap on their upside potential. And the smartphone market does not reflect true market costs and choice because you have carrier subsidies, and vendor lock-in via contracts. With all of these intervening factors in place, the market is situated for Android to take the market share (as its average price per unit plunges) and Apple to take the profits (they already control the majority of the profits in the smartphone market).

With MP3 players, you have no vendor lock-in and no hardware subsidies, so it's more a reflection of true market demand. Even with Microsoft trying to replicate the PC licensing model with PlaysForSure (and subsequently abandoning that approach in favor of trying to recreate the iPod ecosystem with the Zune), Apple took over 2/3 of the media player market and continues to control that market share.

The tablet market shares some similarities with both markets, so I don't think Apple will completely dominate like they do with MP3 players. But, I also don't see Android with the same uptake that they have with smartphones.

You can talk about choice and variety, but Apple has one fundamental advantage over the Android competitors -- component cost. I've not followed every model announced at CES, but my impression of the Android tablets so far is that they can only match or beat the current iPad price points by 1) offering up smaller screens; and/or 2) going to a carrier-subsidized model similar to smartphones that requires long-term data contracts. So far, about 2/3 of iPad sales have been the wi-fi only models. This indicates to me that the carriers (and subsidized contracts) will not have nearly as much influence over the tablet market as they do with smartphones.

With regard to components, as an example I read that Apple has supposedly placed a 20 million unit LCD panel order for the upcoming iPad 2. This display would feature 4X the pixel density of the current iPad screen. This presents problems for other tablet manufacturers because 1) Apple has now cleaned out much of the available supply for those types of LCD panels; and 2) Apple pays cash up front, which gives them even more favorable pricing. Supposedly, the primary reason that most of the new Android tablets have come out in the 7" screen size is because Apple's volume purchasing made 10" touchscreens short supplied and prohibitively expensive for everybody else. If Apple moves to higher resolution panels, you will see more 10" Android tablets, but those will only match last year's iPad screen resolution.

The choice and variety argument was also used with MP3 players. But, the iPod still prevailed for a multitude of reasons, many of which still apply with the iPad.


Note: I agree that a lot of tech reviewers focus way too much on spec sheets (which is why some were shocked at how well the iPad sold)... Spec sheets don't matter to most users... in 1994, I used to analyze the specs of any computer I planned to buy... Now I just walk into a store and pick up the cheapest laptop from a brand I know (as I'm sure it will run any basic application I plan to use on it)... However, if you have specific needs then features will matter... Suppose you really want to use a tablet to write shorthand notes or draw, so you need a stylus? Or You need a camera? Or, unlike you, the person views many sites that run flash (though flash is awful)? Then an iPad just won't meet that persons needs... so they'd have to look elsewhere... One device just can't appeal to all users...

We'll see how this all plays out once Android 3.0 (and WebOS 2.0 and RIM's PlayBook) comes out. I think the spate of Android 2.2 tablets announced at CES will fade once the iPad 2 debuts (no different than how most of the Windows 7 slates displayed at CES a year ago never made it to market). They're too close in price to the iPad, and 2.2 lacks the polish needed for larger screens.

Once they get situated I think competing tablets will do better against the iPad than competing MP3 players did against the iPod. But, I doubt they will gain as much traction as Android smartphones have.