Talk:Comparison of tablet computers

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Proposal to merge Comparison of ARM tablets into this page[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
The result of this discussion (no objections after 11 months) was to merge Comparison of ARM tablets to this article. Hakimio (talk) 18:17, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

As "Comparison of tablet PCs" already has all the details (and much more) about all the tablets listed in "Comparison of ARM Tablets" page, I suggest merging "Comparison of ARM tablets" into this page. Hakimio (talk) 22:53, 11 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Support. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk to me 23:11, 24 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

NFC and temp range[edit]

Near field communication (NFC) and temp range columns were removed from "Media Tablets" and "Older Tablets" tables. NFC was removed because only few MOBILE PHONES implement NFC specification, ZERO tablet PCs has it. "Temp range" was removed because it's hard to find this spec for non-industrial Tablet PCs and only industrial tablet users actually care about it. Hakimio (talk) 19:18, 31 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

USB[edit]

An extra column should be added with USB connector type and possibly mention host support. This feature can make the difference between a toy and a workhorse.

HDMI & other outputs[edit]

As the previous comment says, an extra column could be added for HDMI connector when present. Also, some has wired Ethernet on breakout cable, why not include all device connectivity ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pierrot Lafouine (talk • contribs) 01:38, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Touch and input details need to be mentioned[edit]

that had to be the first thing but it is missing here. please update and list input capabilities of devices listed and by the way, why most of the boxes carry question marks? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 116.71.48.42 (talk) 09:32, 8 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The ability of tablets provide good drawing / diagramming capability, including the use of a stylus for input, is a major omission from this article. Anyone wanting to create drawings/diagrams for business or pleasure will want to compare these capabilities between tablets (and hence end up looking at this comparison page). I hope that someone in the know adds this information, perhaps as a separate section. It might make sense for there to be a number of such sections, each discussing the use of differing tablet types for different purposes (information), rather than just tables containing technical specifications (data). FreeFlow99 (talk) 15:55, 25 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Article name[edit]

Shouldn't this be "COMPARISON of tablet PCs"? This article is the only one in over 2 million articles to use that term, besides the link from the Tablet PC article. When you're done making changes, you should move the article, and correct the wikilink. -- 84.108.93.10 (talk) 11:27, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't agree, since the article includes Apple Mac devices which are not PCs and are not 'PC compatible'. FreeFlow99 (talk) 15:58, 25 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Clean up[edit]

This page is an absolute shocker. If you are going to edit it, do try and keep the table in order Aronzak (talk) 07:54, 1 September 2008 (UTC) I'd also like the sort option commonly available on wikitables. 138.87.158.162 (talk) 17:18, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If a manufacturer makes several different tablet models, they should be listed separately. Otherwise, it is impossible to neatly list specifics about the products (in a single table row) because different models have different specifications. 71.146.69.154 (talk) 09:50, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Prices[edit]

I suggest that price information has no place in this article. Firstly, it's parochial. It can apply only to one place (and no-one will tell me where that is). Secondly, it's ephemeral, and commits editors to endless updating. Thirdly, it's useless: what do I do with that information? Fourthly, it's against policy. From Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not

Away with them! Richard Pinch (talk) 07:10, 16 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ftr, I removed the prices a little while ago Nave.notnilc (talk) 20:16, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ehmm; I was the one who created this article.

I added prices to be able to compare the best specs to the best price. If anyone wishes to buy a a tablet pc (which are usually pricy), they can compare to spend their bucks the best possible way. Its not about making a sales catalog, rather the opposite, if people are aware which device is best, they will buy this one instead of popular tablets/pc's (eg Eee PC, ...) so that this will keeps things more competitive and more beneficial to the customer rather than the manufacturer (so actually I made this in the intrest of anti-consumerism. Anyways, perhaps you may input a the price again or a "price rating eg 1-9". Especially the Nokia 810 should be rated as its a affortable device for a change (600€ instead of the regular 1500-2000€) 81.246.176.126 (talk) 09:19, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It seems strange to me that price should be singled out as one metric to be excluded; surely it is as relevant to any comparison between products for sale as any other metric. Prices may change over time but so do specifications. Specifications can also vary between countries. If we wanted to avoid country specific pricing, to be consistent, we should avoid country specific product availability as well? I can see instances where listing prices would not make sense, eg the current price of tomatoes, since this price is highly volatile and regionalised. Tablets are different and there ought to be a reference price, eg USD price in the US or Euro price (rather than local prices) to allow comparison of value. After all, this is a comparison article. FreeFlow99 (talk) 16:08, 25 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Other tablets[edit]

A company called Best Buy is selling and advertising a line of 7-inch Prestige Tablets made by a company called Visual Land. Should these tablets have listing here? http://www.visual-land.com/me-107.html Truth4Sale (talk) 22:12, 24 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

These may need to be included: 1&1 SmartPad, Cisco Cius, Dell Streak, E-Noa Interpad, Huawei S7, Lenovo LePad, Samsung Galaxy Tab, SmartQ T7, Toshiba Smart Pad, Toshiba Folio 100, Velocity Micro Cruz Reader —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.182.223.239 (talk) 07:10, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I found this page while researching tablets with dual digitizers. I noticed neither MotionComputing CL 900, nor Fujitsu Stylistic Q550 were listed. Both are 10 inch Windows tablets with active digitizers. I found reviews on PCMag.com, but don't have time to track down all the specs. Also, it would be useful to designate dual/active digitizing input rather than just "multitouch capacitive". Aaronmcd42 (talk) 22:28, 24 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I also noticed the Archos 101 G9 was missing but Archos 80 G9 was listed. The archos 101 G9 is available with 250GB storage. Great table!--66.14.229.142 (talk) 22:39, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Requiring of a little aid[edit]

I can suggest several columns of information for this.

1. Architecture under Processor instead of the dual use for the Frequency column, or possibly omit all but the name of the Processor.

2. Collapse the OS Choices into one column, also renaming it to 'Operating System'...we could probably list multiple operating systems (in the case of most android devices, which can run run of the mill Linux, as well as probably Chrome OS (to varying degrees)).

3. Separating out the resolution and type column into 'Resolution' and 'Display Technology' (which brings up problems of what to do with that whole 'Display' meta-column. I suggest abolishing the meta-column and replacing it with 'Display Size', 'Display Technology' and 'Input Technology', or more appropriate, sufficiently sophisticated phrasing for it)

4. Pardon the parlance, but O.O OMG (apologies, there is no better way to convey one's reaction), switch to sortable tables.

I have a question, is it possible to easily change a normal table to a sortable one, or does it require the creation of a new table and entering all the information- if so, is it possible to copy over information from the non-sortable to sortable table with only minimal vetting?

Since its currently the wee hours of the morning here, I'll be back to work quite strenuously on this page beginning of Boxing Day (from a GMT point of view). Is it preferable to make large changes, or incremental ones to the page? While one runs the risk of editing conflicts, the other also involves a crowded changelog.

I would very much like to see this page continue on, as it is a highly valuable resource for informing the reader of the tablet environment.

124.168.56.71 (talk) 14:01, 25 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Also, is it really necessary to split the iPad and such into a distinct UMPC section? The distinction is essentially based on their weight, which is as vague as defining what a planet is- it is just a fuzzy line, dictated by whoever is naming the objects in question. In this case, some of the UMPCs are in fact heavier than some of the ordinary slates...hence, we should merge the categories. 124.168.56.71 (talk) 02:02, 26 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

SDD?[edit]

Is "SDD" a typo of "SSD" in the Slate table? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.225.134.88 (talk) 03:43, 6 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This topic should be deleted[edit]

There may have been a period where the limited number of tablet PCs made this page viable. It is completely out of date now and will only get worse in this respect. The tablet PC market is due to explode and this topic will never be able to keep up. I can't see how this topic belongs in an Encyclopedia at all. I think this should be removed. 83.216.149.7 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 00:36, 23 February 2011 (UTC).[reply]

It's useful[edit]

I searched for "tablet comparisons wiki" specifically for this reason. I couldn't find this information anywhere else. Perhaps it could be split into release years to avoid it getting too large. Nibinaear (talk) 17:48, 28 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]


Just FYI at the time 83.216.149.7 posted his suggestion, the article was a total disaster and looked like this. No need to revive discussions that are more than a year old. BTW, tablets released in 2010 were moved to a separate tables. Hakimio (talk) 20:40, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Revision 417238085[edit]

Hi, I've made some big changes to the table layout for the slate tablets (ideally I would have liked to merge them all but just this took forever). Hopefully they cleanup the article a bit and appease some of your concerns. Unfortunately the sortable doesn't cope well with the dual-level headings (with the rowspan and colspans) so it's been disabled temporarily. When we find a workaround, I hope we can turn it back on. Also, I'd like to see if we could merge Comparison of ARM tablets into this.

Some of the Tablet PCs with little or no data were removed such as: 

* Raon Digital Vega
* Wibrain B1L
* Amrel Rocky Apex, Patriot
* Motion Computing M1200, M1300, M1400, LE 1700, LS 800
* Electrovaya Scribbler SC4000 series
* JLT8404 Field Tablet PC
* Viewsonic V1100
* LG Xnote C1, LT-20-47CE manufactured by COWON
* COWON Q5W
* Nexcom 2100 <ref>[http://www.ruggedpcreview.com/3_slates_nexcom_mtc2100.html Nexcom 2100]</ref>
* RMT Switchback/Duros <ref>[http://www.ruggedpcreview.com/3_handhelds_rmt_switchback.html RMT switchback]</ref>

Also, the Asus T83 [1] was removed as it seems to be a prototype and not a production model tablet PC.

When adding newer tablets, please try to put it in it's correct alphabetical position, and follow the conventions set by the other rows.

It still needs a lot of cleanup but at least it's a start... Adammw (talk) 11:51, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Prices more important than graphics card, etc[edit]

I say bring back the price column, and base it on the manufacturer's RRP using the Yen:euro exchange rate at the time of release. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.141.18.220 (talk) 20:31, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Extra tablets[edit]

Add in HTC Flyer, see http://www.htc.com/www/product/flyer/overview.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.182.214.13 (talk) 07:51, 28 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Green tickYAdded. Hakimio (talk) 07:49, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Linux column in Convertible table[edit]

What does the red X mean? Apparently "does not work". If so, I suspect that most uses of it are wrong.

I've been using Fedora and Ubuntu Linux on my Lenovo x61 for years.

Linux can be hit or miss on notebooks, but usually works in recent years. Sometimes one particular component isn't supported yet (eg. modem).

A more strict question would be "is Linux supported (certified??) on this system by the manufacturer". That's interesting but far from the whole story.

This column cannot easily be maintained. Verification is hard to come by. Perhaps it should be deleted. DHR (talk) 18:42, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It just means that linux is not preinstalled by the manufacturer.Hakimio (talk) 17:12, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

article rename[edit]

According to the article Tablet PC, the iPad is not a PC. This article, however, lists the iPad. Therefore, I think the article should be renamed 'Comparison of tablet computers' to avoid conflicting articles.50.103.241.71 (talk) 22:10, 11 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

PC means personal computer. Even some people think that apple computers are superior than computers produced by other vendors, it's not a valid reason to say that apple computers are not PCs.Hakimio (talk) 20:48, 28 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dell Inspiron Duo[edit]

Not sure if you class this as a convertible (whatever that is) or a hybrid but it's not mentioned in the article. It's a fairly new well advertised laptop with 2gb ram that the screen flips over on for it be become a touch screen windows 7 tablet. It also has 2 USB ports, a headphone jack and built in webcam. Thanks Jenova20 12:34, 16 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Convertible means it can operate in standard laptop mode or in tablet mode without needing to attach or remove anything. Hybrid tablets are those that can be converted into laptops by attaching some other hardware.Hakimio (talk) 16:02, 16 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that, shouldn't Asus Eee Pad be just in the hybrid section then or did you mean for some tablets to be in more than one section?
An easier way may just be to split them into Hybrid, Convertible, regular, industrial etc and get rid of sorting by screen size.
That could be added into the article in the same way storage size is.
Thanks Jenova20 10:35, 17 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The article should also use the manufacturer battery life as each review from a different source can vary wildly by what they do with it and the manufacturer would only list their best battery life.
Thanks Jenova20 12:28, 17 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes, it was intentional, because Eee Pad is both Hybrid and Media tablet.
  • Having only three tables (Slate, Hybrid and Convertible tablets) results in slate table being way too large to navigate comfortably.
  • Different manufacturers use different techniques to measure battery life. Engadget reviewers always use the same technique - looping same video at normal brightness level. That's why I prefer numbers provided by engadget. Also usually manufacturers don't even provide battery life in hours, they only provide Wh or number of battery cells. Hakimio (talk) 17:59, 19 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
If engadget is always used for every PC then i see no problems with that.
Thanks Jenova20 09:39, 22 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

how about Drawing?[edit]

why the artcile has no info about stylus?
I'd like to use tablet PC as a graphics tablet, so I need info which tablet PC is sensetive to pressure of stylus. also I'd like to have info about graphic editors available for tablet PCs (Idot (talk) 16:39, 23 August 2011 (UTC))[reply]

Interesting question, there are many brands of available stylus and some just dont work on many smartphone/tablet screens.
This could be a useful addition.
Thanks Jenova20 08:14, 24 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • There are way too many columns at this point Hakimio (talk) 17:47, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • Justified opinion, but its enforcement by self-appointed page governor Hakimio is, dare I say, idiotic. I added columns for camera, accelerometer, gyroscope and compass, and Hakimio summarily removed / censored that information from this Wikipedia page. Hakimio probably doesn't know that users care much more e.g. about camera resolution than a tablet's weight or thickness, which are quite similar across manufacturers. If Hakimio thinks there are too many columns, how about removing the nearly useless columns like "Manufacturer" — which is already present in the name column, as in "Lenovo Thinkpad", "Samsung Galaxy", "Apple iPad" etc. The Bluetooth, Wi-Fi and Storage type (essentially synonymous with SSD these days), which are features / characteristics that are so standardized and commonplace that they are almost irrelevant for comparison purposes; most automobiles have four wheels, and it's therefore nearly useless to explicitly list the number of wheels in a table of comparison between various automobiles. The accelerometer, gyroscope and compass features are not universally distributed, and yet, they are quite significant as they are enabling technologies e.g. for augmented reality and direction or dynamics/aware tablet applications. Hakimio, if you feel so possessive about this page, have fun in your own personal playground. I'm outta here. 81.164.9.155 (talk) 12:10, 1 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • there are no any column for this point (Idot (talk) 04:07, 30 August 2011 (UTC))[reply]
  • The new column is interesting just to a couple of people Hakimio (talk) 17:47, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • the main artilce of this list - Tablet computer shows that many millions of people who use Chinese and other East Asian characters are interesed in using stylus, even more than people who just want draw pictures (Idot (talk) 04:07, 30 August 2011 (UTC))[reply]
      or you wanted to say "The new column is interesting just to a couple of billions of people"? (^_^) Idot (talk) 04:07, 30 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      or since I am an Asian I should suggest that you are racist and all Asian people for your is equal to "couple of people" ? (Idot (talk) 04:11, 30 August 2011 (UTC))[reply]
  • None of the listed tablets provide such functionality. Hakimio (talk) 17:47, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • any proof? at least some tables do have stylus(Idot (talk) 04:07, 30 August 2011 (UTC))[reply]
  • Column filled with question marks does NOT add any value to the table. Hakimio (talk) 17:47, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Conclusion: such column will not stay. Hakimio (talk) 17:47, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • absolitelly wrong "conclusion", it's just your's unhumble opinion (Idot (talk) 04:07, 30 August 2011 (UTC))[reply]
  • Why the listed 8" and larger screen media tablets are not suitable for artists? Because they use capacitive touchscreens. That means you can write on them by using SPECIAL stylus, but they are NOT sensitive to PRESSURE. If you are looking for graphics tablet, you should investigate some of the Wacom tablets which are not compared here.
  • When I was saying "couple of people", I was referring to artists because you named the column "avilability of optional stylus sensetive to pressure (required for drawing)". Maybe some people are interested if stylus can be used for writing but I doubt that many are interested if the screens of the tablets are pressure sensitive.
  • Information about input technology is already listed and by going to the linked article you can always find out if stylus can be used and if the screen is sensitive to pressure. Hakimio (talk) 07:03, 30 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • In my opinion, input method should be listed PROPERLY. If the input is dual digitizer (capacitive + active), it should be listed as such for the many people who rule out any tablet without writing/drawing ability. I know the Lenovo Thinkpad has this technology, as well as a few others. The HTC Flyer & Jetstream, the HP Slate 500, and several Windows tablets. I noticed Motion Computing & Fujitsu both have 10" dual digitizer tablets with Windows, and they aren't even listed. Aaronmcd42 (talk) 22:37, 24 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • absolutely agree! (Idot (talk) 04:48, 25 September 2011 (UTC))[reply]
pro drawing
contra drawing
conclusion

=> to add section

I think this is something important to mention, but it seems best to put it under the existing column we already have for "Input technology" - e.g., as is now done for the Samsung Slate PC. Mdwh (talk) 20:33, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Include screen area[edit]

It would be useful to include the screen area, rather than just the diagonal measure. Diagonal measures are easy to inflate by making the tablet wider without making it taller (e.g.) Just as the fad for wide screen monitors has lead to screens which can show less information, but sound more impressive than older standard format screens. The area gives a meaningful way to compare the amount of information you can see on tablets that do not have the same aspect ratio.

Area could be added as a separate column, or replace the less useful diagonal measure. Zodon (talk) 08:22, 30 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Why I don't think it's such a good idea:

  • You can use calculators like this one to calculate the area if you really need it
  • The table is bloated with lots of columns already
  • The diagonal measure is always included by the manufacturer while the screen area is never included. Because of that it not only complicates the addition of tablets but also replaces the spec which is well known to average user with something which is rarely used and appreciated mostly only by advanced users.

Hakimio (talk) 08:57, 30 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think we should just stick with the widely used and accepted diagonal measurement.
Thanks Jenova20 09:45, 30 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Tablets between 7-8" display[edit]

There is a gap between the display size tables. Where you put tablets between 7-8" display? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.54.183.66 (talk) 22:29, 9 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Tablets up to 8" (including 7.99") should be added to 5"-7" screen table and 8" and larger (including 8.00") go to 8" screen and larger table. Hakimio (talk) 13:25, 18 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Convertible and Hybrid[edit]

Convertibles and hybrids are not defined in the article. They should be. By word definition, a convertible is something that can change into something else, with or without help, while a hybrid is something that is a combination of two or more things. How do these words apply here? - KitchM (talk) 04:29, 17 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Convertible means it can operate in standard laptop mode or in tablet mode without needing to attach or remove anything. Hybrid tablets are those that can be converted into laptops by attaching some other hardware. Hakimio (talk) 07:54, 17 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Whilst it makes sense to have convertibles separate, I'm not sure about hybrids. I mean, you can get stands and even physical keyboards for many tablets (a quick search reveals numerous products for IPads). So we're making the distinction purely on whether such things are shipped as standard. Given that Apple themselves supply such add-ons officially [2], I think there isn't a real distinction here worthy of an entirely separate table (at best, we could list whether a separate keyboard comes as standard under the Input technology?) Mdwh (talk) 20:40, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Why are older tablets separate?[edit]

It's unclear to me why we bother with a separate table depending on whether a tablet was released after 2009 or not. It's not like there's a large number of tablets in the older table to require a separate list. Perhaps one could draw a line when the ARM-based tablets started appearing, though I'd say the cut-off date should be 2008, so that the Archos ARM tablets of 2009 be included.

Alternatively, if we're worried about the table becoming unmanageably large, I think that's going to happen anyway - if we want to split by year, we're better off having also separate tables for 2010, 2011, and so on, rather than just "2010 onwards" - splitting out the few older tablets does nothing to solve that problem. Mdwh (talk) 20:46, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In the beginning of 2012 tablets released in 2010 will be also moved to "Older" section and this will be repeated every year. As you have guessed, this is done to keep the table size relatively small. The tables will not be merged at any point and "Comparison of tablet computers" will not become similar to Comparison of netbooks. Hakimio (talk) 18:06, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of "CPU Architecture" and "Battery Type" columns[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
The result of this discussion (no reaction in 1.5 months) was to remove the columns. Hakimio (talk) 17:27, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I propose to remove CPU Architecture and Battery Type columns. Here are the reasons:

CPU Architecture

  • x86 tablets can be separated from ARM tablets by sorting CPU Model column as all x86 CPUs listed here are made by Intel
  • Column takes a LOT of valuable space
  • No other specification sheets or comparison pages include CPU Architecture

Battery Type

  • It's highly insignificant
  • Specification is hard to find
  • Information about battery type for many tablets listed here can not be verified as no source links include the info
  • Column takes valuable space
  • Almost all of the tablets nowadays come with lithium-polymer batteries

If you oppose the removal of these columns, please clearly state your reasons.

Hakimio (talk) 18:29, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Missing Tablets - Samsung[edit]

  • Samsung Galaxy Tab 2 (7.0" and 10.1"). The specs have been released for this.
  • Samsung Galaxy Note 10.1
  • Samsung Galaxy Note (Specs)
  • Samsung Galaxy Note 10.1 LTE (GT-N8020) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.30.131.227 (talk) 13:27, 8 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nibinaear (talk) 17:41, 28 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

7" Galaxy Tab 2 was added earlier and I have just added 5.3" Galaxy Note. The other two are missing some specs at this point and most probably will be added once they are actually released. Hakimio (talk) 20:28, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Green tickYAll of the tablets were added. Hakimio (talk) 12:43, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

tablet p.c.'s vs. smartphones/tablets/similar "devices"[edit]

propose separate tablet p.c. and "devices" sections. basically separate "android" from "windows" o.s. types. tablet-pc-review.toptenreviews.com similar to that but its out of date. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Person400000 (talk • contribs) 02:33, 15 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Firstly there are very few decent windows 7 tablets, secondly windows 8 RT OS for ARM tablets will be just another OS for mobile devices, more like Android or iOS than windows for normal computers. I don't see any reason to make a separate table just for windows tablets. Hakimio (talk) 17:27, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of "Storage Type" column[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
The result of this discussion (no objections after more than a month) was to remove the column. Hakimio (talk) 12:51, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I propose to remove Storage Type column. Here are the reasons:

  • Almost all of the tablets released nowadays come with SSDs
  • It is easy to determine if some tablet comes with SSD or HDD just by looking at storage capacity. SSD capacity is always a power of 2 (8, 16, 32, 64) while the number of GB in HDD usually ends with "0" (40, 80, 160, 250). Also, HDDs usually have a much higher capacity
  • "HDD" and "SSD" suffixes were already added to the names of different "archos 80 g9" models to separate them
  • It takes space, increases scrolling distance when using smaller screens and doesn't provide real value
  • No other specification sheets or comparison pages include "storage type"

If you oppose the removal of these columns, please clearly state your reasons.

Hakimio (talk) 13:42, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Missing tablets[edit]

Samsung Galaxy Note 10.1 LTE (GT-N8020), Aakash tablet, Digiko DK700n, Sanei N83, Yarvik Tab 364/Tab 461, Kurio 7 and Zenithink ZTpas C91, Sony Tablet P missing unsigned comment added by Parin mscit (talk • contribs) 11:24, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There are hundreds of cheap (quality and price) tablets from China and India nobody cares about. I don't think those should be included in this comparison. Hakimio (talk) 10:28, 13 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Chinese SoC not represented.[edit]

I think it is unfortunate that there are none of the cheap Chinese tablets in this comparison. I understand that it is hard to pick a few, but there are important ARM SoC that are only being used in these tablets. For example the Allwinner A31 chip which is the first tablet-level quad-core Cortex A7 tablet. I think it is pretty unique. It is unfortunate to not even have a single one of these in the comparison when the fact is that the first quad-core Cortex A7 is being shipped in the Chinese market and probably will not even exist outside of China until long after Qualcomm ships their SoC in Q2'13. Personally I would want to have the Onda v972 in the list as a good representative of this chip. In the future, this might repeat itself if Allwinner launches an as of today unknown chip A40 based on big.LITTLE - they could be the first to implement this design, and again, not representing the Chinese designs would be a shame. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.234.170.160 (talk) 22:29, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • There are some tablets that use cheap SoCs from China - there are tablets using Rockchip and Amlogic SoCs included in the comparison. If someone is interested they can google to find more cheap tablets that use them.
  • Cortex-A7 are cheap low power cores mainly used to save power when normal (Cortex-A15 or A9) cores are not necessary.
  • Even if Allwinner launched something "unknown" (which might just be another cheap Soc using outdated ARM architecture) just now, it doesn't automatically make it anymore relevant than it was before
  • There are hundreds of cheap low quality Chinese tablets in the market. There isn't enough space here to fit them all.

Hakimio (talk) 20:04, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have added Onda V972. The specs do look quite good - retina display (2048 x 1536), pretty powerful PowerVR SGX544MP2 GPU, 2GB of RAM :) Hakimio (talk) 17:34, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

HP Slate 7[edit]

Somone might want to add HP Slate 7 to the table. It is coming out in April 2013. • Sbmeirow • Talk • 05:39, 25 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Table split by OS is inconsistent[edit]

If it makes sense to have separate tables for iOS and Windows, it makes sense to split Windows into Windows 8 ("real Windows") and Windows RT. Microsoft marketing may not be making the distinction, but it should be made as the same application binaries will not run on both systems. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 160.83.42.135 (talk) 15:49, 11 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There is no separate table for iOS - Android and iOS are in the same table. "Windows RT" is still windows and I don't see any need to create a new table just for a couple of tablets, which might as well disappear from the market quite soon, because nobody is buying them (Samsung already cancelled production of their tablet with Win RT). Also there is always an option to sort by OS if you want to see Win 8 tablets grouped together. Hakimio (talk) 08:24, 13 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Samsung Galaxy Note II is a tablet?[edit]

Someone included Galaxy note 2 as a tablet but they come in a new category of PHABLETS(thanks to engadget). I think it should be removed from the list. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.227.175.66 (talk) 15:29, 12 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Can a PPI column be added to these tables?[edit]

Title pretty much covers it. Can a PPI (pixels per inch) column be added to these tables? I feel like that would be important information for some who want to compare tablets in terms of pixel density instead of just resolution or tablet size. Neillithan (talk) 11:29, 2 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Samsung Galaxy Note Pro 12.2[edit]

Is seems this model is not in the list of android tablets with "large" screen; maybe it should be added ? — 31.39.233.46 (talk) 07:59, 27 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Done --Jerome Potts (talk) 10:50, 8 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Cameras[edit]

Very disappointed to find comprehensive comparisons without camera information, I see from the previous discussion that someone tried but it was rejected without any real reason or discussion. I intend to add such a column, if there is a good reason not to, let me know before I waste my time and effort! :-) Tony Wills (talk) 07:31, 29 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Is a bad list better than no list at all?[edit]

I had a quick look at this list, noticed a lot of issues with the article. Most recent release date is 2014 (17 months ago at this time), and the list is very incomplete. I would suggest this list should just be deleted. Leave the comparison lists to the commercial sites or whoever, having such a poor list just junks up Wikipedia. If anything, a simple list of products with linkage to their Wikipedia page and manufacturer site would be adequate and more practical to keep up to date. Kid Bugs (talk) 15:26, 3 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I added all the iPad devices as of right now. There are issues and incomplete information, such as cameras. Just because some of it is out of date doesn't mean it should be deleted. Making a new table with less information shown would make it easier to update. --Frmorrison (talk) 16:54, 20 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Comparison of tablet computers. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:26, 29 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Comparison of tablet computers. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:52, 11 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This page needs some work...[edit]

This page needs some work. Like, a lot of work. There are dozens of blank cells. There are tons of uncited specifications. A lot of the sources are bare links, and need to be preserved. The tables don't have the same formatting in many places. Several years of tablets are straight up not there. Even the grammar has issues in some places. We, as a community, need to work together to fix this page. To start, let's fill in the cells that don't have data. After that, we need make sure that all sources are still valid, and find replacements if they are not (don't forget to not use bare URLs). Next, we need to make the formatting consistent across tables (consistent font size, consistent specification columns, consistent column order, consistent terminology [ie. making sure not to say "CPU" in some places and "CPU Model in others], etc. After that, we need to start adding in new tablets. Feel free to make suggestions if you think you have a better plan, or have other ideas. I believe in you. We can do it! -Consume roofing tiles Consume roofing tiles (talk) 05:19, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Comparison_of_tablet_computers&oldid=1201080288"