or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Current Mac Hardware › Content sales predicted to near 30% of iPad hardware revenue
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Content sales predicted to near 30% of iPad hardware revenue

post #1 of 97
Thread Starter 
The sale of applications, e-books, newspapers and magazines for the iPad is predicted to equal nearly 30 percent of the revenue Apple will earn from selling the hardware by the end of 2011.

Analyst Brian Marshall with Broadpoint.AmTech issued a note to investors Tuesday forecasting the "sticky" nature of the iPad and content purchases for the new device. He believes content revenue will top 10 percent of total iPad hardware revenue by December of 2010, and a year later that number will nearly triple.

"We believe the iPad offers a rich media experience that will translate into a content-based recurring revenue stream over time," Marshall wrote.

If true, it would be a significant change for Apple, which had long maintained that both the App Store and iTunes do not create much profit for the Cupertino, Calif., company. In January, Apple Chief Financial Officer Peter Oppenheimer said the company runs "a bit over break even" for both the App Store and iTunes stores. Apple has said for some time that those businesses are not meant to be profit generators, but rather a means of attracting customers to the products they represent.

The analyst has also increased his forecast for iPad shipments in the 2010 calendar year to 4 million units, up from a previous prediction of 2.2 million. He said that "if the device lives up to its potential," he could see it shipping more than 7 million in this year alone, a number that skews higher than most Wall Street estimates.

Accordingly, Marshall has also raised his earnings per share estimates for 2010 by 6 percent, to $12.75. That's up from his previous prediction of $12, and above the Wall Street consensus of $12.14.

Marshall said he believes the general view of the iPad, particularly in the media, is overly pessimistic.

"We note the vast majority of the naysayers have not yet had the opportunity to use the iPad on a firsthand basis," he wrote. "As we stated in the past, we were hooked after the first 15 minutes of use. In our view, the true genius of the device is its media/content aspects (e.g. eBooks, newspapers/magazines, Apps/games, movies/TV episodes, etc.) which we believe will be recurring in nature."



Broadpoint.AmTech has increased its price target for AAPL stock to $280, from $264, and reiterated its "buy" rating. The iPad, which starts at $499, goes on sale in the U.S. April 3, while pre-orders begin on Friday.
post #2 of 97
No real surprise. The cheap initial price was telling. This is a razor-and-blades strategy.

The 'Pad will be the bestest way to buy stuff from the iSore. Beyond that, it doesn't seem bestest to me in any other respect.
post #3 of 97
I think the iPad is going to be HUGE, HUGE, HUGE! (and for women a great mobile device as we already carry purses and such).
post #4 of 97
It's not a surprise that content will be one of the big driving forces behind the iPad's popularity. Who isn't amazed by the content presentation and intuitiveness of an iPad?
iPad News, App Reviews, and More: iPadNewsUpdates.com
Reply
iPad News, App Reviews, and More: iPadNewsUpdates.com
Reply
post #5 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by ElmCityWeb View Post

It's not a surprise that content will be one of the big driving forces behind the iPad's popularity. Who isn't amazed by the content presentation and intuitiveness of an iPad?

IMO, with respect to movies, the content presentation is horrible. The device uses the 20th century 3:4 aspect ratio, while most modern video fits better on 16:9. And the 'Pad will not display in HD.

Additionally, the lack of flash kills it as a 'web browser. So far today, I've watched two videos on news sites, the latest being an Al Jazeera piece on the mideast peace talks. With a 'Pad, that would not have been possible.

So for content consumption, IMO, the 'Pad is so deficient as to be unacceptable.
post #6 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by iGenius View Post

No real surprise. The cheap initial price was telling. This is a razor-and-blades strategy.

The 'Pad will be the bestest way to buy stuff from the iSore. Beyond that, it doesn't seem bestest to me in any other respect.

I couldn't disagree more. Contrary to the naysayers, I think this product has real potential. I like the form factor, I love the apps that have been demo'ed, and I'll buy one in an instant. I think the win is the simplicity, the idea of making an appliance ... something one can leave around the house and just grab when you need it. The form factor, not to mention the interface, of a traditional computer is far less accessible.

There are lots of things I'd like it to do, but for a first flurry into this space, I think this is good. I'd like web-cam, of course; I hate the thick bezel; and whilst I like finger driven input, it would also be cool to be able to use a pen for drawing and taking notes --- perhaps with character recognition. At present, my impression is that the resolution of the touch sensing technology will not make pen writing feasible. I think they said something like a 1000 sensors on the glass ... that's ok for fingers but not for pens.

I also really wanted MacOS X, but in the context of an appliance the iPhone OS may make most sense. I like the idea of killing off general access to the file systems, and instead sharing data implicitly across compatible applications using some form of tagging. I would also have liked multi-tasking to be made generally available, and I'm not sure I understand the rationale for limiting this.

So ... roll on the launch, I think its a great product.
post #7 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by iGenius View Post

...
So for content consumption, IMO, the 'Pad is so deficient as to be unacceptable.

Well there is a battle going on and I'm not sure who will win. I like the idea of open standards and lighter weight technologies than flash, but there is no doubt in my mind that this is a commercial fight between apple and adobe. The former do not want to provide an alternate execution platform on the iPhone and iPad, as it will undermine Apples control.

In the long run it wont matter. If Apple win, and they may, then content providers will adapt to use the prevailing open standards. They want people to visit their sites, after all. If they Apple lose, then you'll get your flash ... in some form.
post #8 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by evad View Post

So ... roll on the launch, I think its a great product.

IMO, there are two things I'd like a tablet for: Media consumption and 'web browsing.

The 'Pad has the wrong aspect ratio for media consumption. And it will not display HD.

For the 'web, there will be huge frustrating holes in the content, given that the 'pad will not work with most popular embedded video content.

I'll pass. I'm hugely disappointed with the 'Pad. I thought it would be exactly what I've wanted, but now I find that the two most promising uses are each fatally compromised.

But it will be the best iSore portal ever made. They will sell a zillion of them, and iSore revenue will go through the roof.
post #9 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by iGenius View Post

IMO, with respect to movies, the content presentation is horrible. The device uses the 20th century 3:4 aspect ratio, while most modern video fits better on 16:9. And the 'Pad will not display in HD.

Additionally, the lack of flash kills it as a 'web browser. So far today, I've watched two videos on news sites, the latest being an Al Jazeera piece on the mideast peace talks. With a 'Pad, that would not have been possible.

So for content consumption, IMO, the 'Pad is so deficient as to be unacceptable.

You've posted the same anti-iPad nonsense numerous times now. I doubt that you are incapable of reading or comprehending the many many responses that have talked about the logic for 4:3 aspect ratio (Hint: Portrait mode).

Therefore, one has to conclude that your obtuseness on this is 100% trolling. You are frankly adding nothing to the discussion -- please stop.
post #10 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by evad View Post

In the long run it wont matter. If Apple win, and they may, then content providers will adapt to use the prevailing open standards. They want people to visit their sites, after all. If they Apple lose, then you'll get your flash ... in some form.

I don't care about flash. Instead, I care about watching 'web video. And if the 'Pad will not do it, I'll wait for a product that does.

That might be because the world moves into Apple closed-off space, of it might be because a rival comes out with a nice tablet that is not missing important functionality. Time will tell.
post #11 of 97
AI

Marshall said he believes the general view of the iPad, particularly in the media, is overly pessimistic.

"We note the vast majority of the naysayers have not yet had the opportunity to use the iPad on a firsthand basis," he wrote. "As we stated in the past, we were hooked after the first 15 minutes of use. In our view, the true genius of the device is its media/content aspects (e.g. eBooks, newspapers/magazines, Apps/games, movies/TV episodes, etc.) which we believe will be recurring in nature."

I concur with most of the responders that this is no surprise that the iPad will generate more revenue for Apple than just from hardware sales. The question was just how much.

On a different issue I was struck by the statement that the users were hooked after using the iPad. Knowing how some people I know are CrackBerries or intense iPhone users made me do some online research. The following is the result:

Stanford Survey

http://www.macworld.com/article/1469...addiction.html

http://www.livescience.com/technolog...on-100308.html

Addiction to Technology

http://www.livescience.com/technolog...h-addicts.html

Paying for content

http://www.technewsdaily.com/will-co...t-online-0216/
無心 The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders., Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit__Edward Abbey
Reply
無心 The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders., Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit__Edward Abbey
Reply
post #12 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by iGenius View Post

IMO, there are two things I'd like a tablet for: Media consumption and 'web browsing.

The 'Pad has the wrong aspect ratio for media consumption. And it will not display HD.

The iPad will display HD (and 720p is HD) in the correct aspect ratio for it. It may not use up the whole screen but so what as it didn't on most laptops before it.

Quote:
For the 'web, there will be huge frustrating holes in the content, given that the 'pad will not work with most popular embedded video content.

Those "holes" haven't bother iPhone or iPod touch users much. By June, there could be about 100 million such users, most of whom use the web. It won't be much longer before most web sites that matter will be converting over.

Quote:
I'll pass.

That's great; now there will be one more for someone who wants it.
"you will know the truth, and the truth will
set you free."
Reply
"you will know the truth, and the truth will
set you free."
Reply
post #13 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by iGenius View Post

This dismissive misunderstanding is insulting.

I've specifically noted that the antique aspect ratio might make the 'Pad better for reading books. But it fatally compromises the use that I would put it to: Media consumption.



Go **** yourself. I'll make my points no matter how badly you misunderstand them.

You're not just an obtuse troll, but a crass one too. So what else is new.
post #14 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by iGenius View Post

IMO, with respect to movies, the content presentation is horrible. The device uses the 20th century 3:4 aspect ratio, while most modern video fits better on 16:9. And the 'Pad will not display in HD.

Additionally, the lack of flash kills it as a 'web browser. So far today, I've watched two videos on news sites, the latest being an Al Jazeera piece on the mideast peace talks. With a 'Pad, that would not have been possible.

So for content consumption, IMO, the 'Pad is so deficient as to be unacceptable.

Watching movies is only one of the uses for the iPad. Before HD TV people rented movies from the likes of Blockbusters to watch movies on their TVs. Even widescreen movies were ok if you didn't mind the black lines above and below the screen. The iPad isn't a replacement for your HD TV. If you are away, and you want to watch a movie where you don't have access to an HD TV--then this is an alternative.
無心 The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders., Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit__Edward Abbey
Reply
無心 The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders., Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit__Edward Abbey
Reply
post #15 of 97
To be clear, the article doesnt require an interpretation that Apple has changed strategy, notwithstanding the statement If true, it would be a significant change for Apple.

Revenue and earnings are very different animals. Revenue is how much money one sold ones products for. Earnings is the difference between revenue and how much it cost to create/acquire the products being sold. Thus, large revenues do not necessarily translate into large earnings. For Apple, because there is only a small difference between the acquisition/distribution costs of iTunes content and the price it is sold (a bit over break even), even though there are very significant revenues (10 billion songs sold), the earnings arent as significant.

Which is a long way of saying you can sell a lot of stuff but that doesnt mean you are making any money.

A final clarification. In the first line, it says the sale of applications ... for the iPad is predicted to equal nearly 30 percent of the revenue Apple will EARN [emphasis added] from selling the hardware... This really means app sale revenue will be nearly 30 percent of hardware revenue it doesnt mean that app earnings will be 30% of hardware earnings. It could be, but the analyst report doesnt say that.

My two cents on aspect ratios: widescreen is becoming more and more standard for video with HD adoption. But, today, there is still a lot of 4:3 content (older TV shows, kids shows, etc.). And, for text, 4:3 is probably a little more user-friendly. As the mix of media shifts and becomes clearer, I don't think it will be very difficult for Apple to change the aspect ratio of the iPad (and, instead of pointing out the horizontal black bars and wasted screen real estate for wide screen content, we'll point out the vertical bars for 4:3 content). In my case, only the kids will be watching video on the iPad so 4:3 is fine.
post #16 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

Therefore, one has to conclude that your obtuseness on this is 100% trolling. You are frankly adding nothing to the discussion -- please stop.


Quote:
Originally Posted by iGenius View Post

This dismissive misunderstanding is insulting.

Go f**k yourself. I'll make my points no matter how badly you misunderstand them.

Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

You're not just an obtuse troll, but a crass one too. So what else is new.

Can we have some sense of civility here??

TAKE A DEEP BREATH AND
無心 The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders., Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit__Edward Abbey
Reply
無心 The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders., Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit__Edward Abbey
Reply
post #17 of 97
this got posted in the wrong place. sorry.
post #18 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by iGenius View Post

No real surprise. The cheap initial price was telling. This is a razor-and-blades strategy.

The 'Pad will be the bestest way to buy stuff from the iSore. Beyond that, it doesn't seem bestest to me in any other respect.

Apple uses very much the opposite of a razor and blades strategy. They charge a lot for the razor and sell the blades at cost to encourage the sales of more razors. Actually, they charge a lot for the razor and even more for its accessories.
post #19 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by rare comment View Post

To be clear, the article doesnt require an interpretation that Apple has changed strategy, notwithstanding the statement If true, it would be a significant change for Apple.

Revenue and earnings are very different animals. Revenue is how much money one sold ones products for. Earnings is the difference between revenue and how much it cost to create/acquire the products being sold. Thus, large revenues do not necessarily translate into large earnings. For Apple, because there is only a small difference between the acquisition/distribution costs of iTunes content and the price it is sold (a bit over break even), even though there are very significant revenues (10 billion songs sold), the earnings arent as significant.

Which is a long way of saying you can sell a lot of stuff but that doesnt mean you are making any money.

A final clarification. In the first line, it says the sale of applications ... for the iPad is predicted to equal nearly 30 percent of the revenue Apple will EARN [emphasis added] from selling the hardware... This really means app sale revenue will be nearly 30 percent of hardware revenue it doesnt mean that app earnings will be 30% of hardware earnings. It could be, but the analyst report doesnt say that.

My two cents on aspect ratios: widescreen is becoming more and more standard for video with HD adoption. But, today, there is still a lot of 4:3 content (older TV shows, kids shows, etc.). And, for text, 4:3 is probably a little more user-friendly. As the mix of media shifts and becomes clearer, I don't think it will be very difficult for Apple to change the aspect ratio of the iPad (and, instead of pointing out the horizontal black bars and wasted screen real estate for wide screen content, we'll point out the vertical bars for 4:3 content). In my case, only the kids will be watching video on the iPad so 4:3 is fine.

Agreed on earnings vs revenues.

There had to be a compromise somewhere regarding the screen aspect ratio. If Apple wanted to produce something to watch movies then the iPad would have been long and narrow. Knowing that people would be using the iPad for other media--online books, magazines, newspapers and browsing the Internet this appear to be the best compromise. But then none of us have had a chance to use the iPad yet--have we. See you all at the Apple STORE on April 3 or shortly thereafter.
無心 The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders., Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit__Edward Abbey
Reply
無心 The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders., Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit__Edward Abbey
Reply
post #20 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by rare comment View Post

this got posted in the wrong place. sorry.

When I read the post below this one I thought the poster stoled your quote.
無心 The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders., Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit__Edward Abbey
Reply
無心 The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders., Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit__Edward Abbey
Reply
post #21 of 97
Of course it will. The iPad is a content portal (Apps, eBooks, Movies). The success of the App Store is huge and the best way to keep the momentum going is to expand it to include new devices.
post #22 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by NasserAE View Post

Of course it will. The iPad is a content portal (Apps, eBooks, Movies). The success of the App Store is huge and the best way to keep the momentum going is to expand it to include new devices.

I also foresee the iPad helping to boost Mac sales the way other iDevices have. It's a win-win-win for Apple.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #23 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark2005 View Post

The iPad will display HD (and 720p is HD) in the correct aspect ratio for it. It may not use up the whole screen but so what as it didn't on most laptops before it.

It will NOT display 720p while watching a movie in HD format. When displaying 16:9 content, the vertical resolution is nowhere near 720. Pan and scan movies might display in 720, but that is not HD.

The 'Pad will NOT display HD. Either the sides are cut off, which is not HD, or the vertical resolution is much lower than minimum HD.

But I'd wager that somebody else will do it right, and offer a 1080p 16:9 screen.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mark2005 View Post

Those "holes" haven't bother iPhone or iPod touch users much. By June, there could be about 100 million such users, most of whom use the web. It won't be much longer before most web sites that matter will be converting over.

Maybe someday the 'Pad will be OK for surfing. As of now, it is not even minimally acceptable, IMO.

I can forego the full web on my iPhone, but if I buy a tablet for web consumption, I expect it to meet some kind of a minimum standard.

The antique aspect ratio kills it for movies, and the lack of web video kills it for the web. For me.
post #24 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

You're not just an obtuse troll, but a crass one too. So what else is new.

You reply to trolls? Please go away. Please killfile me immediately.

I will not tolerate personal insults on this forum.
post #25 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by FineTunes View Post

Watching movies is only one of the uses for the iPad. Before HD TV people rented movies from the likes of Blockbusters to watch movies on their TVs. Even widescreen movies were ok if you didn't mind the black lines above and below the screen. The iPad isn't a replacement for your HD TV. If you are away, and you want to watch a movie where you don't have access to an HD TV--then this is an alternative.

But a better alternative would be a different tablet - one that does everything it 'Pad will do, AND will display standard modern content full-screen.
post #26 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by iGenius View Post

The antique aspect ratio kills it for movies, and the lack of web video kills it for the web. For me.

So are you gonna hold out for a tablet with a 2.35:1 ratio?
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #27 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by iGenius View Post

IBut I'd wager that somebody else will do it right, and offer a 1080p 16:9 screen.

Do you have any idea how utterly silly that statement sounds?!!? Are you even serious!?!

[CENTER]"A 10 INCH 1080p HD RESOLUTION SCREEN"[/CENTER]

Really?!?!
Apple Fanboy: Anyone who started liking Apple before I did!
Reply
Apple Fanboy: Anyone who started liking Apple before I did!
Reply
post #28 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by rare comment View Post

My two cents on aspect ratios: widescreen is becoming more and more standard for video with HD adoption. But, today, there is still a lot of 4:3 content (older TV shows, kids shows, etc.). And, for text, 4:3 is probably a little more user-friendly. As the mix of media shifts and becomes clearer, I don't think it will be very difficult for Apple to change the aspect ratio of the iPad (and, instead of pointing out the horizontal black bars and wasted screen real estate for wide screen content, we'll point out the vertical bars for 4:3 content). In my case, only the kids will be watching video on the iPad so 4:3 is fine.

Your underlying assumption seems to be that Apple embraces dying technology. That is very different from the gloss applied by most folks here.
post #29 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by rare comment View Post

Apple uses very much the opposite of a razor and blades strategy. They charge a lot for the razor and sell the blades at cost to encourage the sales of more razors. Actually, they charge a lot for the razor and even more for its accessories.

Yes. That has been their traditional strategy. AI thinks that they have a new strategy, and when they emphasized (and keep emphasizing) the price of the 'Pad, it made me tend to agree that the strategy may be changing.

I was also impressed that in order to explain the lack of a camera in the iTouch, iSteve said that they were engineering it to meet a price point. This was the first time I've heard Apple say anything like that. Steve's statements, put together, are evidence that maybe a new strategy is in the offing.
post #30 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveGee View Post

Do you have any idea how utterly silly that statement sounds?!!? Are you even serious!?!

[CENTER]"A 10 INCH 1080p HD RESOLUTION SCREEN"[/CENTER]

Really?!?!

He's also going to wait for a 2.35:1 ratio which makes that 1080p have a horizontal pixel count of 2538 — which is nearly as many pixels wide as the 27" iMac — because letterboxing or cropping the image will apparently ruin the experience. I guess he's never watched a video outside of a movie theater.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...ping_133x1.jpg (image)
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #31 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by FineTunes View Post


There had to be a compromise somewhere regarding the screen aspect ratio. If Apple wanted to produce something to watch movies then the iPad would have been long and narrow. Knowing that people would be using the iPad for other media--online books, magazines, newspapers and browsing the Internet this appear to be the best compromise. But then none of us have had a chance to use the iPad yet--have we. See you all at the Apple STORE on April 3 or shortly thereafter.

IMO, a compromise wouild have been a compromise: Somewhere between 4:3 and 16:9. Just like the iPhone.

This was not a compromise, instead, it was an all-or-nothing kind of a deal. And it makes the device laughably insufficient for movie consumption. YMMV.
post #32 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by extremeskater View Post


Any and all comments anti or pro have no factual data to back them up because right now there isn't any data.

Fact: The iPad has a 4:3 aspect ratio, while most movies are widescreen.
Fact: The 'Pad will not display in HD, which has become very common.
Fact: The 'Pad will not display flash video, and therefore will not display the vast majority of 'web video.

Fact: For what I want, the 'Pad is fatally deficient.
post #33 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

So are you gonna hold out for a tablet with a 2.35:1 ratio?

Naw. 16:9 is fine as a compromise. Even something with a compromise ratio between SD and HD would be OK, like 16:10. But the antique 4:3 is not remotely OK for me, given that I'd want a tablet to watch movies with. 4:3 leaves a lot of wasted real estate when watching normal video content, and results in a sub-HD tiny picture.

I used to have a 4:3 CRT "HD" TV. It too was fatally compromised when watching HD cable. I now have a proper HD set, which is MUCH better. The height of the screen is about the same as the old one, but it is the proper width now. Going back to 4:3 is not a direction for me.


And frankly, I'm pretty surprised that Apple has introduced technology that is deader than dead. They are known for deleting older, but still viable technologies. This time around, they revived a dead one.
post #34 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveGee View Post

Do you have any idea how utterly silly that statement sounds?!!? Are you even serious!?!

[CENTER]"A 10 INCH 1080p HD RESOLUTION SCREEN"[/CENTER]

Really?!?!

I think that a 12 inch screen would be better. As of now, I'm staring at a 15 inch 1080p screen.

What is ridiculous about having full HD in a tablet?
post #35 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by iGenius View Post

Naw. 16:9 is fine as a compromise. Even something with a compromise ratio between SD and HD would be OK, like 16:10. But the antique 4:3 is not remotely OK for me, given that I'd want a tablet to watch movies with. 4:3 leaves a lot of wasted real estate when watching normal video content, and results in a sub-HD tiny picture.

I used to have a 4:3 CRT "HD" TV. It too was fatally compromised when watching HD cable. I now have a proper HD set, which is MUCH better. The height of the screen is about the same as the old one, but it is the proper width now. Going back to 4:3 is not a direction for me.

And frankly, I'm pretty surprised that Apple has introduced technology that is deader than dead. They are known for deleting older, but still viable technologies. This time around, they revived a dead one.

1) There is no wasted real estate when you scale the content.

2) You are throwing around and interchanging terms like SD and HD as if the content and displays are designed in unison, when they aren't, not to mention that iPad isn't an SD panel.

3) a ratio is a distraction for you? Seriously? Most CE, especially when it comes to video, is designed to be a distraction, a time waster or time replacer.

4) Instead of taking a myopic view of the world-o-tech by being surprised by it, perhaps you should look at it from an objective viewpoint for once. Apple doesn't have 16:9 on their iPhone or Touch yet people have been watching video on that 3.5" display for years now so I think watching video on a 10" display will work out just fine.

5) good luck in the future trying to find and anamorphic phone display with 1080p because letterboxing or scaling is bad.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #36 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by iGenius View Post

Don't put words in my mouth. Only jackasses do that.

I added the details to the comments you made. Don't be made because I pointed out that many movies use a 2.35:1 aspect ratio which makes even the widescreen TVs require letterboxing.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #37 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by iGenius View Post

Naw. 16:9 is fine as a compromise. Even something with a compromise ratio between SD and HD would be OK, like 16:10. But the antique 4:3 is not remotely OK for me, given that I'd want a tablet to watch movies with. 4:3 leaves a lot of wasted real estate when watching normal video content, and results in a sub-HD tiny picture.

I used to have a 4:3 CRT "HD" TV. It too was fatally compromised when watching HD cable. I now have a proper HD set, which is MUCH better. The height of the screen is about the same as the old one, but it is the proper width now. Going back to 4:3 is not a direction for me.


And frankly, I'm pretty surprised that Apple has introduced technology that is deader than dead. They are known for deleting older, but still viable technologies. This time around, they revived a dead one.

so go watch hd on tv and GTFO....who cares whiny baby..go buy something THAT DOES NOT EXIST except in your own head. Maybe you can find a company that will build JUST FOR YOU, a magical unicorn sparkly device for you lil princess. Because we all know the world revolves around you...
post #38 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by iGenius View Post

You reply to trolls? Please go away. Please killfile me immediately.

I will not tolerate personal insults on this forum.

JUST GET OVER IT AND
無心 The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders., Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit__Edward Abbey
Reply
無心 The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders., Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit__Edward Abbey
Reply
post #39 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by iGenius View Post

But a better alternative would be a different tablet - one that does everything it 'Pad will do, AND will display standard modern content full-screen.

Whatever.
無心 The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders., Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit__Edward Abbey
Reply
無心 The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders., Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit__Edward Abbey
Reply
post #40 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

1) There is no wasted real estate when you scale the content.

True, but I am no fan of pan and scan, nor am I a fan of squashed or stretched content. Watching widescreen content on a narrow screen results in a small picture and wasted screen real estate. I don't care about the black bars. Instead, I care about the small picture. That's why I got a 16:9 TV instead of a 4:3 TV.

Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

2) You are throwing around and interchanging terms like SD and HD as if the content and displays are designed in unison, when they aren't, not to mention that iPad isn't an SD panel.

Fair enough. I thought my meaning was clear.
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

3) a ratio is a distraction for you? Seriously? Most CE, especially when it comes to video, is designed to be a distraction, a time waster or time replacer.

The antique aspect ratio is not a distraction for me. So your point is misplaced.

As I have said, the small picture is the dealbreaker for me. If normal content was 4:3, like it used to be in the before times, it would not be a problem. But an antique aspect ratio is sub-optimal for one of my main uses.


Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

4) Instead of taking a myopic view of the world-o-tech by being surprised by it, perhaps you should look at it from an objective viewpoint for once. Apple doesn't have 16:9 on their iPhone or Touch yet people have been watching video on that 3.5" display for years now so I think watching video on a 10" display will work out just fine.
:

A phone is a compromise product. And the iPhone is closer to a modern aspect ratio than the 'Pad.

I'm not looking for a big compromise in a tablet computer. So I'll wait until somebody else does it right.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Current Mac Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Current Mac Hardware › Content sales predicted to near 30% of iPad hardware revenue