The Touch is a tablet. I don't agree, though, that it's strictly semantics. I think it valid to refer to a product with let's say a 4.75-inch screen a revised Touch and not an iPad. It is a different class of device to be used in different scenarios. They would be companions not variations of the same theme. Owning both would make sense. On the other hand, a 7-inch tablet would represent an alternative that is dramatically inferior to either in some important areas.
In this case a screen smaller than 5" isn't the focus, it's a 7" display. In what way would a 7" iPod be inferior to a 7" iPad or be considered anything other than a tablet? Serious question.
Why would Apple care about the used market when pricing their products? Have they ever shown even the slightest consideration for that?
What you should have in your "pricing model" is separate prices for iPad 2 and iPad 3 since there is an expectation that both will continue to be on sales after the iPad 3 is released. I doubt Apple will price the iPad 2 with any consideration of the used market, either.
I could see that Apple keeps both models in production and then at a future point in time they replace the iPad 2 with a smaller model. Not saying they will have a smaller iPad, but that's how they could approach the release such a device.
He has a point about the pricing. Going from 10" to 7" doesn't adjust the price much (or at all for some components) so you have to use less grade components and even offer less HW features to bring down the price. If they do offer a 10" iPad 2 for $399 that leaves a 7" at $299... and that's at 8GB. It's hard to make a case for such a device as I think it could negatively impact the iPad market for the longterm. I think a 7" at $100 less than the 10" model with the same capacity but with a 1024x768 display seems more feasible, but that also has hurdles.
In this case a screen smaller than 5" isn't the focus, it's a 7" display. In what way would a 7" iPod be inferior to a 7" iPad or be considered anything other than a tablet? Serious question.
7" iPod Touch is a 3:2 device. That means 22.62 sq inches compared to a 7" iPad at 4:3 with 23.54 sq inches. Then there is the fact that the 7" iPod Touch could have a back panel that isn't milled to cut down on costs, a less engineered logic board, only come in WiFi (no cellular option as is expected with the iPad), use a cheaper display (cheaper tech and lower pixel density), less bright backlight, no digitizer (if the iPad had it), no HD camera on back (only one for FaceTime), battery life that doesn't have to meet or exceed the iPad, year old Apple A chip, less RAM... and on and on. Converting iOS for iPod Touch to 7" would also be cheaper than converting iOS for iPad to 7".
If we say that a 7" iPad is definitely coming I wouldn't expect it until Apple no longer sells the 1024x768 9.7" display iPads. Just like with a larger iPhone display wouldn't come until after they deprecate the 480x320 display. Best to limit the number of displays users need to support when possible.
And as all the smaller iPad imitators have amply demonstrated, a 7 inch tablet is less popular than the current iPad.
But is that because they are 7 inches or because the software running them is inferior? It's not all about size, but it's how you use it.
But seriously, it's correlation vs. causation. You can't pick one convenient statistic (size) and say that's responsible for the end result (low sales). One could look at the classic example of increasing ice cream sales resulting in higher crime rates because the two statistics move in tandom...ignoring the fact that it's the weather than influences both. Both ice cream sales and crime rates increase in the summer time.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
He has a point about the pricing. Going from 10" to 7" doesn't adjust the price much (or at all for some components) so you have to use less grade components and even offer less HW features to bring down the price. If they do offer a 10" iPad 2 for $399 that leaves a 7" at $299... and that's at 8GB. It's hard to make a case for such a device as I think it could negatively impact the iPad market for the longterm. I think a 7" at $100 less than the 10" model with the same capacity but with a 1024x768 display seems more feasible, but that also has hurdles.
They could also differentiate by features. For example, the iPad can import photos from your camera, the iPod Touch and iPhone can't. There is no technical reason for this. It's just Apple's way to direct sales to certain models. Of course, in doing this, we'd be back to the argument that this new device is a large iPad Touch, not a smaller iPad.
I agree that having and iPad 3 and aiPad 2 and a smaller iPad would make for too crowded of a pricing structure. Which is why I suggested that one alternative would be for the iPad 2 to be a temporary lower-priced option until a smaller iPad is released. Having previous gen iPhones as the low-price option makes sense because there's not a whole lot that can be done with the iPhone form factor. But using year-old tablet tech as the low-cost option may not be the best for that market.
Again, not saying there will be a smaller iPad. Just that it's not obvious that it will never happen. A lot of the same rhetoric was written on these boards about there never being a CDMA iPhone for Verizon, and for many of the same kinds of reasons (Apple said ATT was the best, fragmentation of the supply chain, etc).
7" iPod Touch is a 3:2 device. That means 22.62 sq inches compared to a 7" iPad at 4:3 with 23.54 sq inches. Then there is the fact that the 7" iPod Touch could have a back panel that isn't milled to cut down on costs, a less engineered logic board, only come in WiFi (no cellular option as is expected with the iPad), use a cheaper display (cheaper tech and lower pixel density), less bright backlight, no digitizer (if the iPad had it), no HD camera on back (only one for FaceTime), battery life that doesn't have to meet or exceed the iPad, year old Apple A chip, less RAM... and on and on. Converting iOS for iPod Touch to 7" would also be cheaper than converting iOS for iPad to 7".
If we say that a 7" iPad is definitely coming I wouldn't expect it until Apple no longer sells the 1024x768 9.7" display iPads. Just like with a larger iPhone display wouldn't come until after they deprecate the 480x320 display. Best to limit the number of displays users need to support when possible.
Those are all possibilities of course. My question was what would absolutely be inferior if it was an iPod rather than an iPad? Related to that, why shouldn't a buyer consider either one a tablet if it's a 7"+ device?
They could also differentiate by features. For example, the iPad can import photos from your camera, the iPod Touch and iPhone can't. There is no technical reason for this. It's just Apple's way to direct sales to certain models. Of course, in doing this, we'd be back to the argument that this new device is a large iPad Touch, not a smaller iPad.
There is not technical reason they can't make a device at one inch differences between 5 and 15" inches and all market it as an iPad but I think we'd all say that won't happen. I certainly don't see a technical reason for not having a 7" iPad, but I do see many reasons why a 7" iPod Touch would make more sense from a cost, marketing and logistical standpoints.
I will not surprised to see a larger iPod Touch come Wednesday but will be surprised to see a smaller iPad.
Quote:
Again, not saying there will be a smaller iPad. Just that it's not obvious that it will never happen. A lot of the same rhetoric was written on these board about there never being a CDMA iPhone for Verizon, and for many of the same kinds of reasons (Apple said ATT was the best, fragmentation of the supply chain, etc).
There were people saying that CDMA was old tech and not popular enough to warrant it but i think most were more balanced in that they would offer it when it was the right time, just as they will likely offer a China Mobile iPhone when it's the right time.
In this case a screen smaller than 5" isn't the focus, it's a 7" display. In what way would a 7" iPod be inferior to a 7" iPad or be considered anything other than a tablet? Serious question.
Here's my way of distinguishing tablet vs Phone/touch class product.
Does it present a full web browser?
If yes it is a Tablet
if no it is a mobile pocketable device
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
He has a point about the pricing. Going from 10" to 7" doesn't adjust the price much (or at all for some components) so you have to use less grade components and even offer less HW features to bring down the price. If they do offer a 10" iPad 2 for $399 that leaves a 7" at $299... and that's at 8GB. It's hard to make a case for such a device as I think it could negatively impact the iPad market for the longterm. I think a 7" at $100 less than the 10" model with the same capacity but with a 1024x768 display seems more feasible, but that also has hurdles.
I disagree that you need to use lower grade parts. The key to reducing BoM costs isn't using lesser grade electronics it's in the consolidation of parts.
Whereas the iPad has 3 chips to do Accelerometer, Compass and Gyro parts being announced today can do all three functions in a single chip.
This reduces the cost of the chips but even better makes it easier to QA test the product. Any Tablet coming out in Q3 simply has access to more modern internal components and that can have a big influence on overall pricing.
I will not surprised to see a larger iPod Touch come Wednesday but will be surprised to see a smaller iPad.
I'd personally be very surprised to see a smaller Ipad/larger iPod announced this week. Most of the noise to date indicates something for later this year rather than now doesn't it?
And as all the smaller iPad imitators have amply demonstrated, a 7 inch tablet is less popular than the current iPad.
That's because they aren't iPads. The 7" form factor is superior, it's just using Android that sucks.
Quote:
Now, there are no doubt people who think a 7 inch would be the right size, so why not? On the other hand, it might be too hard for Apple to find the right niche (including price points) between the iPod Touch and the Ipad. On the gripping hand, why not just sell a lower price iPad 2?
Why does it have to be cheaper? Make it exactly the same price, and I'll still buy it.
Those are all possibilities of course. My question was what would absolutely be inferior if it was an iPod rather than an iPad? Related to that, why shouldn't a buyer consider either one a tablet if it's a 7"+ device?
1) I detailed examples of inferiority. You can look at the displays of the iPhone and iPod Touch to see one is inferior to the other. Sure, they are both 960x640 resolution but one is IPS and the other TN. That said it's probably not feasible to use TN on a 7" device if even Amazon uses IPS on their $199 loss-leader.
2) The buyer can consider it whatever they want. They can call it a PC if they choose to, but we're talking about what Apple would release so I tackled it from what I think their perspective might be to maximize sales, help the iPod arm and without hurting the iPad arm, hence me suggesting it would be 7" iPod Touch, not a 7" iPad.
I'd personally be very surprised to see a smaller Ipad/larger iPod announced this week. Most of the noise to date indicates something for later this year rather than now doesn't it?
They didn't update the Touch last Autumn. I didn't they would since they've never released the iPhone along with the new Touch and it wouldn't be good to have both at the same time. Now is the time to update the Touch.
My reasoning as to why I wouldn't be surprised by a larger Touch is that to go to a larger iPhone you need to rebuild the UI to be idealized for the new I/O. This would give devs a heads up without giving them an official heads up. I don't expect this... just saying I wouldn't be surprised by it.
Note the iPhone 3GS will likely be pushed aside in favour of the iPhone 4, iPhone 4S and 6th gen iPhone come this Autumn. That means that they'd no longer have to deal with the 480x320 display which would be the time that they could offer a new size. The iPod Touch is already Retina across the board.
So that's three different sources saying that there's a 7.8"-ish minitablet coming this year—DigiTimes, Samsung Securities, and now this from Economic Times.
What would justify a second tablet in one year? A really high-quality autostereoscopic screen is what, so the kids could watch Pixar 3D movies, and adults could watch seriously good 3D like Wim Wenders' Pina, Scorcese's Hugo or Werner Herzog's Cave of Forgotten Dreams. I mention these only to note that the serious directors don't see 3D as a gimmick these days.
Somone is going to be making high-quality glasses-free 3D tablets. Might as well be Apple first. Both AUO and LG have been innovating with parallax-barrier autostereo screens, I believe. This size would be a good starter size to test the technology and the market. If it failed to attract a mass following, it wouldn't be such a disaster, since it would be seen as a niche effort, like a new iPod, and not a flagship product like a new type of iPad.
And yes, Steve/Jony would have been behind it from like 2011.
So that's three different sources saying that there's a 7.8"-ish minitablet coming this year?DigiTimes, Samsung Securities, and now this from Economic Times.
What would justify a second tablet in one year? A really high-quality autostereoscopic screen is what, so the kids could watch Pixar 3D movies, and adults could watch seriously good 3D like Wim Wenders' Pina, Scorcese's Hugo or Werner Herzog's Cave of Forgotten Dreams. I mention these only to note that the serious directors don't see 3D as a gimmick these days.
Somone is going to be making glasses-free 3D tablets. Might as well be Apple first. Both AUO and LG have been innovating with parallax-barrier autostereo screens, I believe. This size would be a good starter size to test the technology and the market. If it failed to attract a mass following, it wouldn't be such a disaster, since it would be seen as a niche effort, like a new iPod, and not a flagship product like a new type of iPad.
And yes, Steve/Jony would have been behind it from like 2011.
If Apple could make a 7" gaming platform that would get good battery life and offer 3D and have a development platform to make 3D games easy that seems like it could be a winner. I'm no so sure about 3D movies on a 7" display being the ideal release platform.
If Apple could make a 7" gaming platform that would get good battery life and offer 3D and have a development platform to make 3D games easy that seems like it could be a winner. I'm no so sure about 3D movies on a 7" display being the ideal release platform.
Me neither on the ideal-for-movies part, maybe more suitable for kids, but that's a good point about 3D games.
Apple has said multiple times that a 7-inch screen is too small for tablet apps.
Can you please do me a favor? Look at your hands and look at a kids hand. If you see that it is smaller you will realize the target market for the 7 or 8 inch iPad: kids, education.
I'd love to have an iPad, but I've already got a sweet Macbook Air so it's hard to justify. Show me a $300 iPad and I'm sold.
And before anyone directs me to the refurb page, no, I'm not going to buy an old iPad 1 or 2.
Apple will never make a 7" iPad, however they will make a 7" iPod, which is what will happen. The iPod Touch already owns the $200 price point, just right for a bigger screen iPod Touch.
I'd personally be very surprised to see a smaller Ipad/larger iPod announced this week. Most of the noise to date indicates something for later this year rather than now doesn't it?
Not impossible. After all, Apple didn't really update the Touch last fall so it could be that the intention is to upgrade it on Wednesday. Just saying.
It wouldn't be the first time that a surprise announcement happened. Don't forget that there has been so much focus on getting the dirt on the next iPad that an update of the Touch could easily fly under the radar.
If Apple updates the Touch at this time I have a one-word explanation for that timing - V-I-T-A.
Would like to see this for car audio applications. Double din is 4x7 with a 8.06" diagonal. Most modern cars have double din head units so adding this would be easy to implement. I've been wanting to see this for a while, car manufactures make gps systems that rarely if ever get updates and they have clunky interfaces. I could see OEM's adding this to cars from the factory too, why invest millions in making your own interface when you can use apple instead?
Apple will never make a 7" iPad, however they will make a 7" iPod, which is what will happen. The iPod Touch already owns the $200 price point, just right for a bigger screen iPod Touch.
Where are you guys coming up with this stuff?
Clearly you've never worked in marketing before.
iPod have a defined category. They primarily play music. The Touch is really the only iPod that can surf the internet, check email etc.
iPads are tablets they read books, play music, web surf and run apps.
There is absolutely no foundation for calling a 7" device an iPod.
Comments
The Touch is a tablet. I don't agree, though, that it's strictly semantics. I think it valid to refer to a product with let's say a 4.75-inch screen a revised Touch and not an iPad. It is a different class of device to be used in different scenarios. They would be companions not variations of the same theme. Owning both would make sense. On the other hand, a 7-inch tablet would represent an alternative that is dramatically inferior to either in some important areas.
In this case a screen smaller than 5" isn't the focus, it's a 7" display. In what way would a 7" iPod be inferior to a 7" iPad or be considered anything other than a tablet? Serious question.
Why would Apple care about the used market when pricing their products? Have they ever shown even the slightest consideration for that?
What you should have in your "pricing model" is separate prices for iPad 2 and iPad 3 since there is an expectation that both will continue to be on sales after the iPad 3 is released. I doubt Apple will price the iPad 2 with any consideration of the used market, either.
I could see that Apple keeps both models in production and then at a future point in time they replace the iPad 2 with a smaller model. Not saying they will have a smaller iPad, but that's how they could approach the release such a device.
He has a point about the pricing. Going from 10" to 7" doesn't adjust the price much (or at all for some components) so you have to use less grade components and even offer less HW features to bring down the price. If they do offer a 10" iPad 2 for $399 that leaves a 7" at $299... and that's at 8GB. It's hard to make a case for such a device as I think it could negatively impact the iPad market for the longterm. I think a 7" at $100 less than the 10" model with the same capacity but with a 1024x768 display seems more feasible, but that also has hurdles.
In this case a screen smaller than 5" isn't the focus, it's a 7" display. In what way would a 7" iPod be inferior to a 7" iPad or be considered anything other than a tablet? Serious question.
7" iPod Touch is a 3:2 device. That means 22.62 sq inches compared to a 7" iPad at 4:3 with 23.54 sq inches. Then there is the fact that the 7" iPod Touch could have a back panel that isn't milled to cut down on costs, a less engineered logic board, only come in WiFi (no cellular option as is expected with the iPad), use a cheaper display (cheaper tech and lower pixel density), less bright backlight, no digitizer (if the iPad had it), no HD camera on back (only one for FaceTime), battery life that doesn't have to meet or exceed the iPad, year old Apple A chip, less RAM... and on and on. Converting iOS for iPod Touch to 7" would also be cheaper than converting iOS for iPad to 7".
If we say that a 7" iPad is definitely coming I wouldn't expect it until Apple no longer sells the 1024x768 9.7" display iPads. Just like with a larger iPhone display wouldn't come until after they deprecate the 480x320 display. Best to limit the number of displays users need to support when possible.
And as all the smaller iPad imitators have amply demonstrated, a 7 inch tablet is less popular than the current iPad.
But is that because they are 7 inches or because the software running them is inferior? It's not all about size, but it's how you use it.
But seriously, it's correlation vs. causation. You can't pick one convenient statistic (size) and say that's responsible for the end result (low sales). One could look at the classic example of increasing ice cream sales resulting in higher crime rates because the two statistics move in tandom...ignoring the fact that it's the weather than influences both. Both ice cream sales and crime rates increase in the summer time.
He has a point about the pricing. Going from 10" to 7" doesn't adjust the price much (or at all for some components) so you have to use less grade components and even offer less HW features to bring down the price. If they do offer a 10" iPad 2 for $399 that leaves a 7" at $299... and that's at 8GB. It's hard to make a case for such a device as I think it could negatively impact the iPad market for the longterm. I think a 7" at $100 less than the 10" model with the same capacity but with a 1024x768 display seems more feasible, but that also has hurdles.
They could also differentiate by features. For example, the iPad can import photos from your camera, the iPod Touch and iPhone can't. There is no technical reason for this. It's just Apple's way to direct sales to certain models. Of course, in doing this, we'd be back to the argument that this new device is a large iPad Touch, not a smaller iPad.
I agree that having and iPad 3 and aiPad 2 and a smaller iPad would make for too crowded of a pricing structure. Which is why I suggested that one alternative would be for the iPad 2 to be a temporary lower-priced option until a smaller iPad is released. Having previous gen iPhones as the low-price option makes sense because there's not a whole lot that can be done with the iPhone form factor. But using year-old tablet tech as the low-cost option may not be the best for that market.
Again, not saying there will be a smaller iPad. Just that it's not obvious that it will never happen. A lot of the same rhetoric was written on these boards about there never being a CDMA iPhone for Verizon, and for many of the same kinds of reasons (Apple said ATT was the best, fragmentation of the supply chain, etc).
7" iPod Touch is a 3:2 device. That means 22.62 sq inches compared to a 7" iPad at 4:3 with 23.54 sq inches. Then there is the fact that the 7" iPod Touch could have a back panel that isn't milled to cut down on costs, a less engineered logic board, only come in WiFi (no cellular option as is expected with the iPad), use a cheaper display (cheaper tech and lower pixel density), less bright backlight, no digitizer (if the iPad had it), no HD camera on back (only one for FaceTime), battery life that doesn't have to meet or exceed the iPad, year old Apple A chip, less RAM... and on and on. Converting iOS for iPod Touch to 7" would also be cheaper than converting iOS for iPad to 7".
If we say that a 7" iPad is definitely coming I wouldn't expect it until Apple no longer sells the 1024x768 9.7" display iPads. Just like with a larger iPhone display wouldn't come until after they deprecate the 480x320 display. Best to limit the number of displays users need to support when possible.
Those are all possibilities of course. My question was what would absolutely be inferior if it was an iPod rather than an iPad? Related to that, why shouldn't a buyer consider either one a tablet if it's a 7"+ device?
They could also differentiate by features. For example, the iPad can import photos from your camera, the iPod Touch and iPhone can't. There is no technical reason for this. It's just Apple's way to direct sales to certain models. Of course, in doing this, we'd be back to the argument that this new device is a large iPad Touch, not a smaller iPad.
There is not technical reason they can't make a device at one inch differences between 5 and 15" inches and all market it as an iPad but I think we'd all say that won't happen. I certainly don't see a technical reason for not having a 7" iPad, but I do see many reasons why a 7" iPod Touch would make more sense from a cost, marketing and logistical standpoints.
I will not surprised to see a larger iPod Touch come Wednesday but will be surprised to see a smaller iPad.
Again, not saying there will be a smaller iPad. Just that it's not obvious that it will never happen. A lot of the same rhetoric was written on these board about there never being a CDMA iPhone for Verizon, and for many of the same kinds of reasons (Apple said ATT was the best, fragmentation of the supply chain, etc).
There were people saying that CDMA was old tech and not popular enough to warrant it but i think most were more balanced in that they would offer it when it was the right time, just as they will likely offer a China Mobile iPhone when it's the right time.
In this case a screen smaller than 5" isn't the focus, it's a 7" display. In what way would a 7" iPod be inferior to a 7" iPad or be considered anything other than a tablet? Serious question.
Here's my way of distinguishing tablet vs Phone/touch class product.
Does it present a full web browser?
If yes it is a Tablet
if no it is a mobile pocketable device
He has a point about the pricing. Going from 10" to 7" doesn't adjust the price much (or at all for some components) so you have to use less grade components and even offer less HW features to bring down the price. If they do offer a 10" iPad 2 for $399 that leaves a 7" at $299... and that's at 8GB. It's hard to make a case for such a device as I think it could negatively impact the iPad market for the longterm. I think a 7" at $100 less than the 10" model with the same capacity but with a 1024x768 display seems more feasible, but that also has hurdles.
I disagree that you need to use lower grade parts. The key to reducing BoM costs isn't using lesser grade electronics it's in the consolidation of parts.
Whereas the iPad has 3 chips to do Accelerometer, Compass and Gyro parts being announced today can do all three functions in a single chip.
http://www.st.com/internet/com/press_release/p3273.jsp
This reduces the cost of the chips but even better makes it easier to QA test the product. Any Tablet coming out in Q3 simply has access to more modern internal components and that can have a big influence on overall pricing.
I will not surprised to see a larger iPod Touch come Wednesday but will be surprised to see a smaller iPad.
I'd personally be very surprised to see a smaller Ipad/larger iPod announced this week. Most of the noise to date indicates something for later this year rather than now doesn't it?
And as all the smaller iPad imitators have amply demonstrated, a 7 inch tablet is less popular than the current iPad.
That's because they aren't iPads. The 7" form factor is superior, it's just using Android that sucks.
Now, there are no doubt people who think a 7 inch would be the right size, so why not? On the other hand, it might be too hard for Apple to find the right niche (including price points) between the iPod Touch and the Ipad. On the gripping hand, why not just sell a lower price iPad 2?
Why does it have to be cheaper? Make it exactly the same price, and I'll still buy it.
Those are all possibilities of course. My question was what would absolutely be inferior if it was an iPod rather than an iPad? Related to that, why shouldn't a buyer consider either one a tablet if it's a 7"+ device?
1) I detailed examples of inferiority. You can look at the displays of the iPhone and iPod Touch to see one is inferior to the other. Sure, they are both 960x640 resolution but one is IPS and the other TN. That said it's probably not feasible to use TN on a 7" device if even Amazon uses IPS on their $199 loss-leader.
2) The buyer can consider it whatever they want. They can call it a PC if they choose to, but we're talking about what Apple would release so I tackled it from what I think their perspective might be to maximize sales, help the iPod arm and without hurting the iPad arm, hence me suggesting it would be 7" iPod Touch, not a 7" iPad.
I'd personally be very surprised to see a smaller Ipad/larger iPod announced this week. Most of the noise to date indicates something for later this year rather than now doesn't it?
They didn't update the Touch last Autumn. I didn't they would since they've never released the iPhone along with the new Touch and it wouldn't be good to have both at the same time. Now is the time to update the Touch.
My reasoning as to why I wouldn't be surprised by a larger Touch is that to go to a larger iPhone you need to rebuild the UI to be idealized for the new I/O. This would give devs a heads up without giving them an official heads up. I don't expect this... just saying I wouldn't be surprised by it.
Note the iPhone 3GS will likely be pushed aside in favour of the iPhone 4, iPhone 4S and 6th gen iPhone come this Autumn. That means that they'd no longer have to deal with the 480x320 display which would be the time that they could offer a new size. The iPod Touch is already Retina across the board.
What would justify a second tablet in one year? A really high-quality autostereoscopic screen is what, so the kids could watch Pixar 3D movies, and adults could watch seriously good 3D like Wim Wenders' Pina, Scorcese's Hugo or Werner Herzog's Cave of Forgotten Dreams. I mention these only to note that the serious directors don't see 3D as a gimmick these days.
Somone is going to be making high-quality glasses-free 3D tablets. Might as well be Apple first. Both AUO and LG have been innovating with parallax-barrier autostereo screens, I believe. This size would be a good starter size to test the technology and the market. If it failed to attract a mass following, it wouldn't be such a disaster, since it would be seen as a niche effort, like a new iPod, and not a flagship product like a new type of iPad.
And yes, Steve/Jony would have been behind it from like 2011.
So that's three different sources saying that there's a 7.8"-ish minitablet coming this year?DigiTimes, Samsung Securities, and now this from Economic Times.
What would justify a second tablet in one year? A really high-quality autostereoscopic screen is what, so the kids could watch Pixar 3D movies, and adults could watch seriously good 3D like Wim Wenders' Pina, Scorcese's Hugo or Werner Herzog's Cave of Forgotten Dreams. I mention these only to note that the serious directors don't see 3D as a gimmick these days.
Somone is going to be making glasses-free 3D tablets. Might as well be Apple first. Both AUO and LG have been innovating with parallax-barrier autostereo screens, I believe. This size would be a good starter size to test the technology and the market. If it failed to attract a mass following, it wouldn't be such a disaster, since it would be seen as a niche effort, like a new iPod, and not a flagship product like a new type of iPad.
And yes, Steve/Jony would have been behind it from like 2011.
If Apple could make a 7" gaming platform that would get good battery life and offer 3D and have a development platform to make 3D games easy that seems like it could be a winner. I'm no so sure about 3D movies on a 7" display being the ideal release platform.
If Apple could make a 7" gaming platform that would get good battery life and offer 3D and have a development platform to make 3D games easy that seems like it could be a winner. I'm no so sure about 3D movies on a 7" display being the ideal release platform.
Me neither on the ideal-for-movies part, maybe more suitable for kids, but that's a good point about 3D games.
Apple has said multiple times that a 7-inch screen is too small for tablet apps.
Can you please do me a favor? Look at your hands and look at a kids hand. If you see that it is smaller you will realize the target market for the 7 or 8 inch iPad: kids, education.
I'd love to have an iPad, but I've already got a sweet Macbook Air so it's hard to justify. Show me a $300 iPad and I'm sold.
And before anyone directs me to the refurb page, no, I'm not going to buy an old iPad 1 or 2.
Apple will never make a 7" iPad, however they will make a 7" iPod, which is what will happen. The iPod Touch already owns the $200 price point, just right for a bigger screen iPod Touch.
I'd personally be very surprised to see a smaller Ipad/larger iPod announced this week. Most of the noise to date indicates something for later this year rather than now doesn't it?
Not impossible. After all, Apple didn't really update the Touch last fall so it could be that the intention is to upgrade it on Wednesday. Just saying.
It wouldn't be the first time that a surprise announcement happened. Don't forget that there has been so much focus on getting the dirt on the next iPad that an update of the Touch could easily fly under the radar.
If Apple updates the Touch at this time I have a one-word explanation for that timing - V-I-T-A.
Apple will never make a 7" iPad, however they will make a 7" iPod, which is what will happen. The iPod Touch already owns the $200 price point, just right for a bigger screen iPod Touch.
Where are you guys coming up with this stuff?
Clearly you've never worked in marketing before.
iPod have a defined category. They primarily play music. The Touch is really the only iPod that can surf the internet, check email etc.
iPads are tablets they read books, play music, web surf and run apps.
There is absolutely no foundation for calling a 7" device an iPod.