"Commenting on avalanche of tablets heading to market. Just a handful of credible entrants. Almost all use 7" screen, compared to iPad at nearly 10" screen. 7" screen is only 45% as large as iPad's screen. Hold an iPad in portrait view and draw a horizontal line halfway down. What's left is a 7" screen...too small. There are clear limits to how close elements can be on the screen before users can't touch accurately. We believe 10-inch screen is minimum necessary." -- Steve Jobs
?One naturally thinks that a 7-inch screen would offer 70 percent of the benefits of a 10-inch screen. Unfortunately, this is far from the truth. ? The reason we [won't] make a 7-inch tablet isn?t because we don?t want to hit [a lower] price point, it?s because we think the screen is too small to express the software.? -- Steve Jobs
This analyst idea, amongst many others, is dead on arrival.
I love the sheer stupidity of this argument. That 7.85" would be too small for the UI, software and apps, despite the fact that all of these were originally designed for a 3.5" screen and that size continues to be the vast majority of devices using said UI, apps etc.
Jobs was great at making misleading, statements and outright lying to further Apple's agenda.
Besides, Apple always thrived on restricting choice and polishing the experience.
Or you could say that Apple spends a lot of time perfecting their product selection and bringing to market only what they feel is 'right'. As such they have a narrower product line, higher quality across the board and better margins. But yes - they are thriving.
They don't believe in 'restricting choice' - they believe their products are the best choices.
I absolutely agree, a 5.5" screen would nicely fill a men's jacket pocket and would find its place in a lady's purse. Samsung has got the Note about right in that respect. Especially if your eyesight is not 20/20 a larger screen helps a lot.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tailpipe
Whether this particular rumour is true or false, it would make sense for Apple to release such a device. As well as a 7.85" screen I'd love to see an iPad with a 5.5" screen.
Why not? Sure, it would be a defensive move that would protect market share, but since iPod touch has all but replaced the Classic IPod, adding iPad screen sizes would give Apple extra SKUs across different price points.
Perhaps the best reason for this is that gives customers greater choice. A larger iPod touch or smaller iPad that could fit into a jacket pocket would be great.
For a 7.85" device, the major applications would be email, reading books, music, and movies on the move.
Retina screen resolutions are essential for success.
At one point he was so off the mark that to make a totally outlandish and guaranteed to be completely off the mark claim was referred to as 'pulling a Shaw Wu'
And I say he's done it again.
Apple has the tablet market. So much so that some legal 'experts' are worried that 'iPad' will go the way of aspirin etc and become a generic term if Apple isn't proactive about dealing with that concern. The new iPad sold as many units in the opening weekend as the total announced Kindle models for the holiday season (most of which were probably not the Fire). So why would Apple feel the need to release a model designed to compete with something they are already kicking to the curb. They wouldn't. But that's the reason Wu and friends are giving for why Apple must do this.
I think that yes Apple looked at the question of a 5-8" iPad model and rejected it. But yes it is possible that they also looked at the 5-6" issue as a solution of what to do with the iPod touch, which is a dying item now that there are so many iPhone choices out there. Parents that want to get their kids an iPod touch are just handing them Daddy's old iPhone when he gets his shiny new 4s etc. A revamp as a 5-6" model that still works for the kiddies, could be used as a remote with a revamped app for your Apple TV STB (or as a game controller for those airplay enhanced games) etc could breath new life into the Touch.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Magic_Al
Steve Jobs decided that people aren't supposed to want this!
No he didn't. Jobs never said that folks aren't supposed to want it. Just that Apple wasn't planning to give it to them because they felt it was a bad choice. Just like they haven't listened to many things folks want like matte screens on the computers or an active digitizer on the iPad or user upgradable iMacs etc.
I love the sheer stupidity of this argument. That 7.85" would be too small for the UI, software and apps, despite the fact that all of these were originally designed for a 3.5" screen and that size continues to be the vast majority of devices using said UI, apps etc.
Jobs was great at making misleading, statements and outright lying to further Apple's agenda.
According to Steve Jobs in an interview with Walt Mossberg, Apple was working on the tablet first, and ended up shelving it when they realized that they could make a phone. The iPhone is a scaled down iPad. To say that iOS was originally designed for a 3.5" screen is simply not true, unless you think that Steve Jobs outright lied. Given your last sentence, I'm guessing that you think that he did.
Further, apps designed for iPad are different than apps designed for iPhone. The reason is screen size. If you scaled Facebook's app on the iPad down to 3.5", it would be near unusable. The buttons would be too tiny, and there would be too many. If you scaled Facebook's app on the iPhone up to 9.7", it would suck. Buttons would be too large, and it would be a terrible waste of screen space.
An inbetween size, 7.85", is complicated. If it were an iPad Mini, then iPad apps would be slightly less usable. If it were an iPod touch HD, apps would be scaled up and ugly. So to suggest that saying a 3rd screen size is complicated is rubbish, is rubbish.
I still think going the other way makes even more sense: make the iPod Nano a full-up iOS device. It will take some serious engineering, but these watch sized devices have untapped potential. Stuff in the new bluetooth, along with some GPS and rudimentary speaker/mic, and you've got a serious platform for development of all kinds of consumer applications. Sport watches and the ever popular dick tracy communicator to name a few. iCloud makes it so it can sync...turn this loose on developers!
According to Steve Jobs in an interview with Walt Mossberg, Apple was working on the tablet first, and ended up shelving it when they realized that they could make a phone.
As I recall what Jobs said was that they shelved the iPad because they didn't think that folks were ready for the idea of a tablet and carrying it around everywhere they go. yes many folks had laptops but that number was very small compared to the total. But the number of folks with a cell phone was much greater and thus that was deemed the better way to get folks into the groove of carrying a little computer around.
Quote:
Originally Posted by brutus009
iPad 2 = 132ppi
iPad 3 = 264ppi
7.85in iPad @ 1024x768 = 163ppi
Is this really going to be ideal for reading? Seems like a step back to me.
the new iPad is 1536p. So why would they make this 7.85 whatever a 768p. They wouldn't. It would be at least 1080p to support the video off the iTunes store.
Whether this particular rumour is true or false, it would make sense for Apple to release such a device. As well as a 7.85" screen I'd love to see an iPad with a 5.5" screen.
5.5" sure, but that is more of a big iPod touch, than a mini iPad. But at least it would be pocketable.
I still think 7.85" 4:3 screen is almost senseless. That is still 65% of the Area of a real iPad. Meaning very small monetary savings in the BoM. So no way this is going to sell in the rumored $250-$299 price point.
Still nearly 6" across in portrait mode (about 7.7" x 6" overall). Too wide to grip in one hand. Too big to fit in any pockets.
I think 7.85" is pointless, but if it does show up it will likely not significantly undercut the lower priced iPad 2, instead it will likely just replace it in the $350-$399 range.
This "analyst" is an idiot and has absolutely no idea what apple is about.
Apple doesn't give people what they want. Apple makes something new and amazing and lets everybody realize they want it.
The iPad "mini" has almost zero marketable value. Why would I want a smaller, crappier iPad? The only way that would work is if apple could somehow drastically drop the price, simultaneously killing the iPad premium brand. Apple will never, I repeat NEVER do that. They have said as a company on numerous occasions that if they can't do something great, then they don't do it. That means they stick to a few markets that they know they can dominate, and that's it. They don't want (nor do they need) to go after the low hanging fruit.
Let Amazon and the android clones make the crappy, small $200 pads. Apple's market isn't cheap crap. Apple's market is making the killer device everyone wants.
I think what we'll see is the Nano step up to take the place of the Touch which will itself grow a little larger.
I suspect Apple will be less focused on hitting a particular price point and more on a device that makes sense. To me that would be a tablet with significant portability advantages over the iPad. Such a device would also come in at a lower price point which is obviously a good thing but I doubt Apple would make a smaller tablet mainly because it would be cheaper. That's how the competition approaches design but not historically how Apple has done it.
Since the goal is significant portability gains, an 8-inch tablet would not work. There are too many pockets that device would not comfortably fit into which begs the question, why make it. If the iPad could stand to be a little lighter, I'm sure in time Apple will engineer some of the weight out of the device. Once that happens, other than price, what advantages would an 8-inch form factor offer to compensate for the disadvantages of using a smaller screen.
I guess if they keep repeating the same rumors year after year, it might come true. Such as the iphone will be larger, the ipad will be smaller, and the Cubs will win the World Series. Ok, maybe not that last one.
A new iPad model with a smaller form factor is an inevitability, in the eyes of one analyst, though Apple is not expected to imminently release such a device.
Shaw Wu with Sterne Agee has heard since 2009 that Apple was experimenting with screen sizes ranging from as small as 4 inches to as large as 12 inches. The latest rumors have suggested that Apple has placed more serious thought into releasing an iPad with a 7.85-inch display.
In a note to investors on Tuesday, Wu said that a so-called "iPad mini" is a "question of when, not if" from Apple. He believes it would make strategic sense for Apple to expand the iPad family to boost sales and ward off the competition.
Wu believes that a smaller iPad would be "the competition's worst nightmare," as most companies already struggled to compete with the iPad when its starting price was $499. Now, Apple continues to sell the 16-gigabyte Wi-Fi-only iPad 2 for $399.
So far, only Amazon has gained any traction, as Wu said the Kindle Fire has found "modest success" at the $199 price point. But Amazon is also believed to be selling the Kindle Fire at a loss as a way to increase the online retailers sales of other goods.
Later this year, Google is expected to offer its own 7-inch tablet priced at under $250. The device is seen as an effort to counter the Kindle Fire, which runs its own heavily modified version of the Google Android operating system, tailored to sell content direct from Amazon.com rather than Google Play.
As for Apple's rumored 7.85-inch iPad, reports have suggested the device will sport a screen resolution of 1,024 by 768 pixels, which is the same as the first-generation iPad and iPad 2. That would allow existing iPad applications to run on the new device without the need for developers to modify them to accommodate a new screen resolution.
Wu believes that if Apple were to release a new, smaller iPad, it would become the new entry-level model and undercut the $399 price of the iPad 2. Such a move would expand Apple's total addressable market and help to round out the product family, he believes.
"We do not sense that the release of an iPad mini is imminent and quite frankly, exact timing is difficult to predict," he said. "However, we do believe it makes both fundamental and strategic sense for AAPL to address at some point."
I think they need to make a BIG one - 17" or more. Fanastic for mixing and working in Garage band/ Logic. With a quad core i7 processor and tons of ram, large onboard HD and full thunderbolt connectivity. OSX with laptop processing power. Get on it, Apple!
The iPad, as it is, has changed my life as a musician. The iRealB, iBooks with a stack of music 20' high wherever I go, Garage band for 5 bucks...the thing kills.
Steve Jobs' brilliant legacy to us all. He worked on this his whole life. Amazing for us all that he brought it to fruition. One of the greatest products I have ever used.
the new iPad is 1536p. So why would they make this 7.85 whatever a 768p. They wouldn't. It would be at least 1080p to support the video off the iTunes store.
They have two resolutions to choose from: 1024x768 or 2048x1536
Anything in-between isn't feasible due to development limitations.
As they're already having a difficult time maintaining production standards for the 2048x1536 resolution on a 9.7in screen, I seriously doubt they'll be able to decrease the screen size without decreasing the resolution.
Hence, a 7.85in iPad will be stuck with a less-than-impressive 163ppi screen.
To help differentiate it from the iPad, simply grow the iPod into a Maxi. It's a subtle but very effective way to segment the market and have your cake too. Actually, surprised Apple hasn't already done it.
Do you mean add a second, larger Touch or replace the current Touch?
Apple needs the iPod Touch in its current form factor, IMO. I always see teens with iPod Touches-they can't afford iPhones or their parents won't let them have one due to data and voice plans. Teens really want a portable iOS device (music, photos, videos, wifi, iMessage) and for many of them the iPod Touch is TRULY "pocketable". Commenters here like to say that 7-8" is pocketable; but let's be honest, it really isn't.
Next to the iPhone and iPad, the iPod Touch is Apple's most important mobile product even if the sales figures do not reflect it. It is a solid iOS entry device, especially since current users will later use the same apps on an iPhone as soon as they can get their hands on one.
I can see adding a larger iPod Touch or smaller iPad, but not doing away with the iPod Touch entirely. That would be a huge mistake as it could open up the truly portable mobile device market, moving Apple consumers away from the current iPod Touch/iTunes/iOS ecosystem to a more mobile device from a different vendor.
As I've said here before, look out for a $299-$349 larger iPod Touch or smaller iPad (8GB flash, Wifi only, Facetime camera only, no Retina display). If it takes off sales-wise, Apple will add a Retina display in the next iteration.
Comments
"Commenting on avalanche of tablets heading to market. Just a handful of credible entrants. Almost all use 7" screen, compared to iPad at nearly 10" screen. 7" screen is only 45% as large as iPad's screen. Hold an iPad in portrait view and draw a horizontal line halfway down. What's left is a 7" screen...too small. There are clear limits to how close elements can be on the screen before users can't touch accurately. We believe 10-inch screen is minimum necessary." -- Steve Jobs
?One naturally thinks that a 7-inch screen would offer 70 percent of the benefits of a 10-inch screen. Unfortunately, this is far from the truth. ? The reason we [won't] make a 7-inch tablet isn?t because we don?t want to hit [a lower] price point, it?s because we think the screen is too small to express the software.? -- Steve Jobs
This analyst idea, amongst many others, is dead on arrival.
I love the sheer stupidity of this argument. That 7.85" would be too small for the UI, software and apps, despite the fact that all of these were originally designed for a 3.5" screen and that size continues to be the vast majority of devices using said UI, apps etc.
Jobs was great at making misleading, statements and outright lying to further Apple's agenda.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/27/yo...shortcuts.html
Besides, Apple always thrived on restricting choice and polishing the experience.
Or you could say that Apple spends a lot of time perfecting their product selection and bringing to market only what they feel is 'right'. As such they have a narrower product line, higher quality across the board and better margins. But yes - they are thriving.
They don't believe in 'restricting choice' - they believe their products are the best choices.
Whether this particular rumour is true or false, it would make sense for Apple to release such a device. As well as a 7.85" screen I'd love to see an iPad with a 5.5" screen.
Why not? Sure, it would be a defensive move that would protect market share, but since iPod touch has all but replaced the Classic IPod, adding iPad screen sizes would give Apple extra SKUs across different price points.
Perhaps the best reason for this is that gives customers greater choice. A larger iPod touch or smaller iPad that could fit into a jacket pocket would be great.
For a 7.85" device, the major applications would be email, reading books, music, and movies on the move.
Retina screen resolutions are essential for success.
Shaw Wu, for goodness sake.
At one point he was so off the mark that to make a totally outlandish and guaranteed to be completely off the mark claim was referred to as 'pulling a Shaw Wu'
And I say he's done it again.
Apple has the tablet market. So much so that some legal 'experts' are worried that 'iPad' will go the way of aspirin etc and become a generic term if Apple isn't proactive about dealing with that concern. The new iPad sold as many units in the opening weekend as the total announced Kindle models for the holiday season (most of which were probably not the Fire). So why would Apple feel the need to release a model designed to compete with something they are already kicking to the curb. They wouldn't. But that's the reason Wu and friends are giving for why Apple must do this.
I think that yes Apple looked at the question of a 5-8" iPad model and rejected it. But yes it is possible that they also looked at the 5-6" issue as a solution of what to do with the iPod touch, which is a dying item now that there are so many iPhone choices out there. Parents that want to get their kids an iPod touch are just handing them Daddy's old iPhone when he gets his shiny new 4s etc. A revamp as a 5-6" model that still works for the kiddies, could be used as a remote with a revamped app for your Apple TV STB (or as a game controller for those airplay enhanced games) etc could breath new life into the Touch.
Steve Jobs decided that people aren't supposed to want this!
No he didn't. Jobs never said that folks aren't supposed to want it. Just that Apple wasn't planning to give it to them because they felt it was a bad choice. Just like they haven't listened to many things folks want like matte screens on the computers or an active digitizer on the iPad or user upgradable iMacs etc.
I love the sheer stupidity of this argument. That 7.85" would be too small for the UI, software and apps, despite the fact that all of these were originally designed for a 3.5" screen and that size continues to be the vast majority of devices using said UI, apps etc.
Jobs was great at making misleading, statements and outright lying to further Apple's agenda.
According to Steve Jobs in an interview with Walt Mossberg, Apple was working on the tablet first, and ended up shelving it when they realized that they could make a phone. The iPhone is a scaled down iPad. To say that iOS was originally designed for a 3.5" screen is simply not true, unless you think that Steve Jobs outright lied. Given your last sentence, I'm guessing that you think that he did.
Further, apps designed for iPad are different than apps designed for iPhone. The reason is screen size. If you scaled Facebook's app on the iPad down to 3.5", it would be near unusable. The buttons would be too tiny, and there would be too many. If you scaled Facebook's app on the iPhone up to 9.7", it would suck. Buttons would be too large, and it would be a terrible waste of screen space.
An inbetween size, 7.85", is complicated. If it were an iPad Mini, then iPad apps would be slightly less usable. If it were an iPod touch HD, apps would be scaled up and ugly. So to suggest that saying a 3rd screen size is complicated is rubbish, is rubbish.
iPad 3 = 264ppi
7.85in iPad @ 1024x768 = 163ppi
Is this really going to be ideal for reading? Seems like a step back to me.
Do want! Exactly what I have been needing to fill the gap between my iPhone and iPad.
Do you really need to fill that gap? "Need" might be a rather strong word for your situation.
According to Steve Jobs in an interview with Walt Mossberg, Apple was working on the tablet first, and ended up shelving it when they realized that they could make a phone.
As I recall what Jobs said was that they shelved the iPad because they didn't think that folks were ready for the idea of a tablet and carrying it around everywhere they go. yes many folks had laptops but that number was very small compared to the total. But the number of folks with a cell phone was much greater and thus that was deemed the better way to get folks into the groove of carrying a little computer around.
iPad 2 = 132ppi
iPad 3 = 264ppi
7.85in iPad @ 1024x768 = 163ppi
Is this really going to be ideal for reading? Seems like a step back to me.
the new iPad is 1536p. So why would they make this 7.85 whatever a 768p. They wouldn't. It would be at least 1080p to support the video off the iTunes store.
Whether this particular rumour is true or false, it would make sense for Apple to release such a device. As well as a 7.85" screen I'd love to see an iPad with a 5.5" screen.
5.5" sure, but that is more of a big iPod touch, than a mini iPad. But at least it would be pocketable.
I still think 7.85" 4:3 screen is almost senseless. That is still 65% of the Area of a real iPad. Meaning very small monetary savings in the BoM. So no way this is going to sell in the rumored $250-$299 price point.
Still nearly 6" across in portrait mode (about 7.7" x 6" overall). Too wide to grip in one hand. Too big to fit in any pockets.
I think 7.85" is pointless, but if it does show up it will likely not significantly undercut the lower priced iPad 2, instead it will likely just replace it in the $350-$399 range.
Apple doesn't give people what they want. Apple makes something new and amazing and lets everybody realize they want it.
The iPad "mini" has almost zero marketable value. Why would I want a smaller, crappier iPad? The only way that would work is if apple could somehow drastically drop the price, simultaneously killing the iPad premium brand. Apple will never, I repeat NEVER do that. They have said as a company on numerous occasions that if they can't do something great, then they don't do it. That means they stick to a few markets that they know they can dominate, and that's it. They don't want (nor do they need) to go after the low hanging fruit.
Let Amazon and the android clones make the crappy, small $200 pads. Apple's market isn't cheap crap. Apple's market is making the killer device everyone wants.
I suspect Apple will be less focused on hitting a particular price point and more on a device that makes sense. To me that would be a tablet with significant portability advantages over the iPad. Such a device would also come in at a lower price point which is obviously a good thing but I doubt Apple would make a smaller tablet mainly because it would be cheaper. That's how the competition approaches design but not historically how Apple has done it.
Since the goal is significant portability gains, an 8-inch tablet would not work. There are too many pockets that device would not comfortably fit into which begs the question, why make it. If the iPad could stand to be a little lighter, I'm sure in time Apple will engineer some of the weight out of the device. Once that happens, other than price, what advantages would an 8-inch form factor offer to compensate for the disadvantages of using a smaller screen.
A new iPad model with a smaller form factor is an inevitability, in the eyes of one analyst, though Apple is not expected to imminently release such a device.
Shaw Wu with Sterne Agee has heard since 2009 that Apple was experimenting with screen sizes ranging from as small as 4 inches to as large as 12 inches. The latest rumors have suggested that Apple has placed more serious thought into releasing an iPad with a 7.85-inch display.
In a note to investors on Tuesday, Wu said that a so-called "iPad mini" is a "question of when, not if" from Apple. He believes it would make strategic sense for Apple to expand the iPad family to boost sales and ward off the competition.
Wu believes that a smaller iPad would be "the competition's worst nightmare," as most companies already struggled to compete with the iPad when its starting price was $499. Now, Apple continues to sell the 16-gigabyte Wi-Fi-only iPad 2 for $399.
So far, only Amazon has gained any traction, as Wu said the Kindle Fire has found "modest success" at the $199 price point. But Amazon is also believed to be selling the Kindle Fire at a loss as a way to increase the online retailers sales of other goods.
Later this year, Google is expected to offer its own 7-inch tablet priced at under $250. The device is seen as an effort to counter the Kindle Fire, which runs its own heavily modified version of the Google Android operating system, tailored to sell content direct from Amazon.com rather than Google Play.
As for Apple's rumored 7.85-inch iPad, reports have suggested the device will sport a screen resolution of 1,024 by 768 pixels, which is the same as the first-generation iPad and iPad 2. That would allow existing iPad applications to run on the new device without the need for developers to modify them to accommodate a new screen resolution.
Wu believes that if Apple were to release a new, smaller iPad, it would become the new entry-level model and undercut the $399 price of the iPad 2. Such a move would expand Apple's total addressable market and help to round out the product family, he believes.
"We do not sense that the release of an iPad mini is imminent and quite frankly, exact timing is difficult to predict," he said. "However, we do believe it makes both fundamental and strategic sense for AAPL to address at some point."
[ View article on AppleInsider ]
I think they need to make a BIG one - 17" or more. Fanastic for mixing and working in Garage band/ Logic. With a quad core i7 processor and tons of ram, large onboard HD and full thunderbolt connectivity. OSX with laptop processing power. Get on it, Apple!
The iPad, as it is, has changed my life as a musician. The iRealB, iBooks with a stack of music 20' high wherever I go, Garage band for 5 bucks...the thing kills.
Steve Jobs' brilliant legacy to us all. He worked on this his whole life. Amazing for us all that he brought it to fruition. One of the greatest products I have ever used.
Cheers,
Cameron
the new iPad is 1536p. So why would they make this 7.85 whatever a 768p. They wouldn't. It would be at least 1080p to support the video off the iTunes store.
They have two resolutions to choose from: 1024x768 or 2048x1536
Anything in-between isn't feasible due to development limitations.
As they're already having a difficult time maintaining production standards for the 2048x1536 resolution on a 9.7in screen, I seriously doubt they'll be able to decrease the screen size without decreasing the resolution.
Hence, a 7.85in iPad will be stuck with a less-than-impressive 163ppi screen.
To help differentiate it from the iPad, simply grow the iPod into a Maxi. It's a subtle but very effective way to segment the market and have your cake too. Actually, surprised Apple hasn't already done it.
Do you mean add a second, larger Touch or replace the current Touch?
Apple needs the iPod Touch in its current form factor, IMO. I always see teens with iPod Touches-they can't afford iPhones or their parents won't let them have one due to data and voice plans. Teens really want a portable iOS device (music, photos, videos, wifi, iMessage) and for many of them the iPod Touch is TRULY "pocketable". Commenters here like to say that 7-8" is pocketable; but let's be honest, it really isn't.
Next to the iPhone and iPad, the iPod Touch is Apple's most important mobile product even if the sales figures do not reflect it. It is a solid iOS entry device, especially since current users will later use the same apps on an iPhone as soon as they can get their hands on one.
I can see adding a larger iPod Touch or smaller iPad, but not doing away with the iPod Touch entirely. That would be a huge mistake as it could open up the truly portable mobile device market, moving Apple consumers away from the current iPod Touch/iTunes/iOS ecosystem to a more mobile device from a different vendor.
As I've said here before, look out for a $299-$349 larger iPod Touch or smaller iPad (8GB flash, Wifi only, Facetime camera only, no Retina display). If it takes off sales-wise, Apple will add a Retina display in the next iteration.
And how big would the buttons be on this mini iPad? They have to be large enough to overcome FFS. (Fat Finger Syndrome)
iPad touch-targets are already bigger than iPhone touch-targets.
Even a slightly smaller iPad would still have decent-sized touch-targets.