Panasonic reveals 4K resolution 20-inch Windows 8 tablet

If there is one trend that we have noticed going on at CES 2013 when it comes to new Windows 8 products, it's "Bigger is better." So far, we have seen Lenovo talk about their upcoming 27-inch all-in-one PC that can also be used as a tablet, and Asus has a new AIO that's 18.4 inches with a screen that can detach to work as a tablet as well.

Today, as part of their CES 2013 press conference, Panasonic made the surprise announcement it would be releasing a 20-inch Windows 8 tablet as well. The product was shown on stage and it will apparently have a screen resolution that Panasonic is claiming will be of the "4K" variety. A specific resolution size was not reported.

Engadget reports that the unnamed Panasonic tablet will come with a stylus that will help the product perform some interesting features, but details were not forthcoming. This appears to be a real tablet, and not just an all-in-one PC that can be used as a tablet.

Pricing and a release date for this new Panasonic Windows 8 product have not been revealed, but if any more info on this device is announced at CES 2013 we will update this post. It's an interesting change for Panasonic, which in the past has released its Toughbook lineup of notebooks but has done little else in the PC hardware space.

Source: Engadget | Image via Engadget

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Gigabyte reveals its second Windows 8 tablet

Next Story

Microsoft updates SkyDrive with improved website features

31 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

The thing is, there isn't a good mobile GPU to push all those pixels when doing 'professional work'.

Just search engine panasonic 20" 4k tablet hands on, and you'll see that the GPU chugs and overheats trying to push all those pixels with any complexity on screen.

This is a product about two years ahead of its time. When 4k becomes the norm for AMD/ATI and NVIDIA, then perhaps retry.

Uplift said,
More crap that just wont sell..

People said that about the regular tablet as well, than they said it about the 7'' tablet. Just because Apple hasnt done it yet doesnt mean it be the next big thing.

Of course this isn't for everybody but companies with too much cash on hand (or to be more precise managers with too much budget) 'need' these kind of things. Coupled with the niche that actually need this and this could become a new corner of the ever growing tablet market.

Uplift said,
More crap that just wont sell..
False. I am sure they dont plan to offer these on retail for typical consumers. They are specific purpose devices for a niche market. Its not designed to be a money maker. Its designed for a company or person who can use it. Much like the Mac.

Again all the trolls can think outside the box. They think because THEY dont need something, no one does. YOU dont represent the whole world.

Heartripper said,
Isn't it too big for a tablet?

It depends on how you define the term.

Is tablet just a form factor, or does it inherently imply mobility? And what is mobility? Does it inherently imply fitting in a pocket? A backpack? Or does it just mean you don't have to plug it in to use it? If you came up with a generic term for an all-in-one display-shaped device without a stand and with a built-in power supply, that term would apply, but it would also apply to what you consider tablets (all squares are rectangles, etc).

This is the problem with people and terminology. Labels usually are very broad, but people add to the definition with characteristics of first generation devices that carry the label, and when second generation devices diverge from that extra definition, people panic. Hell, if it comes down to broad definitions, every tablet and smartphone is a personal computer, after all.

Joshie said,

It depends on how you define the term.

Is tablet just a form factor, or does it inherently imply mobility? And what is mobility? Does it inherently imply fitting in a pocket? A backpack? Or does it just mean you don't have to plug it in to use it? If you came up with a generic term for an all-in-one display-shaped device without a stand and with a built-in power supply, that term would apply, but it would also apply to what you consider tablets (all squares are rectangles, etc).

This is the problem with people and terminology. Labels usually are very broad, but people add to the definition with characteristics of first generation devices that carry the label, and when second generation devices diverge from that extra definition, people panic. Hell, if it comes down to broad definitions, every tablet and smartphone is a personal computer, after all.

Well Apple thinks a tablet cant surpass 9.7". So if you use their definition...then yes. So how big does a car have to be before its not considered a car anymore?

TechieXP said,
Well Apple thinks a tablet cant surpass 9.7". So if you use their definition...then yes. So how big does a car have to be before its not considered a car anymore?

Depends, and that's exactly an example of the phenomenon I talked about: extending the definition of a term to include the specifics of products currently using it.

What's a car to you? Write down your definition. Now think of "cable cars". They're still cars, in the strictly literal sense, after all, but there's a good chance what you wrote down wouldn't include them. A car is just a wheeled vehicle, after all. Where do you go for food on a train? The dining car. So you tell me: how big?

On the original topic, what's a tablet? We constantly redefine words and then get angry when the current redefinition isn't strictly enforced. Isn't that weird? Were stone tablets restricted in their dimension? You might think a common example of stone tablets would be the [relatively portable?] 'commandments' of the Old Testament, but I'd point you to the massive "stone tablet" of The Lion, Witch, and the Wardrobe.

These terms all have broad, *broad* meanings, and our obsession with limiting them to specifics is entirely arbitrary. Why care at all, except to satisfy our desire to leave "the old" behind for "the new"? Why are people so turned off by calling a tablet a PC? Is it any reason other than wanting to leave the PC behind?

/fun fact: if flying cars ever came along, they technically would NOT fall under the paradoxically broad definition of car, since they may no longer have wheels, and yet we may still call them cars simply on the grounds that they move passengers. Talk about a broad definition.

Edited by Joshie, Jan 8 2013, 10:25pm :

1920 x 1080 = 2,073,600
3840 x 2160 = 8,294,400

How many "2,073,600"s fit in a "8,294,400"? Four. Four times the resolution.

erikpienk said,
not really, its only double cause a 1080p=1920x1080 and a 4k=3840x2160, so 4k=2160p

(3840 * 2160) / (1920 * 1080) = 4

It maybe 4x the res but it's not really 4320p which would be 4k

3840 is 4k nor is 2160 true 4 k would have a res more like 7680 x 4320p/i

It's interesting to see a device with a 4k display, though I don't think we should call it a tablet. Isn't it a bit too...big?

be can Apple rush to put product out first to market so they can say they invented the 4K UltraRetina Display?

4K - 4096 x 2160 at 20"
Retina - Up to 2880×1800 at 15"

92GTA said,
Holy hell, what next a 4K 1080p display for my 5" WP8 handset? HAHA!

4K 1080P? *scratches head* contradicting terms...

720p (1280x720).
1080p (1920x1080).
2160p=4K (3840x2160) (+some more variations in this category but all considered 4K)

TechieXP said,
Yep, because you're not smart enough to understand why it isnt funny.

Dude, looking at your latest comments today I wouldn't be calling anyone stupid.