or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › Rumors of smaller Apple iPad models with OLED screens persist
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Rumors of smaller Apple iPad models with OLED screens persist

post #1 of 62
Thread Starter 
Despite the high cost of OLED displays and Apple's continued support of LCD screens with IPS technology, rumors of a next-generation iPad with an OLED screen continue to resurface.

Taiwanese trade publication DigiTimes reported on Tuesday that its sources within overseas component makers indicated that Apple plans to launch a second-generation iPad as soon as the fourth quarter of 2010. The new hardware would reportedly use 5.6-inch and 7-inch OLED displays, with Compal Electronics in the running to supply Apple.

The new models would be in addition to Apple's successful 9.7-inch iPad, which would receive "some minor changes," the report said. The smaller 5.6-inch and 7-inch iPad models would "mainly target the e-book reader market, separating them from the 9.7-inch model, which mainly targets multimedia entertainment," the report said.

It noted that costs of OLED panels are expected to drop, as Samsung Electronics and LG Display have been devoting resources into the development of panels. "With Apple's brand image and high average selling price (ASP, Apple should have no problem adopting OLED panels, which have higher price than standard panels, into its devices," the report said.

DigiTimes Research senior analyst Mingchi Kuo responded to the rumors and noted that Samsung cannot currently meet capacity for OLED displays on its own handsets, making it unlikely they would be able to supply Apple by the fourth quarter of 2010. In addition, Compal is "unlikely" to pursue orders with Apple, because its manufacturing gross margins are much less than what is offered by others.

Rumors of an OLED display on the iPad were around long before Apple even formally announced the device. They have continued to resurface since, with DigiTimes also reporting in April that Apple could adopt OLED displays for its second-generation iPad. At the time, the Taiwanese publication also reported the rumors, but simultaneously cast doubt on them through the analysis of Kuo.

The current iPad LCD screen uses IPS, or in-plane switching, technology. It was developed by Hitachi in 1996, and offers improved viewing angles and color reproductions on screens.

Last November, DigiTimes incorrectly said that Apple would offer an OLED version of the iPad at a cost of at least $2,000 at retail, due to the high cost of such displays. A 9.7-inch OLED display currently costs about $500, or the same price as an entire 16GB Wi-Fi iPad.

In April, an analysis of the parts included in the iPad found the current model's LCD screen with IPS technology to be the most expensive component, at an estimated $95. In all, the $499 iPad was said to cost $260 in components.
post #2 of 62
that sounds like it would be a waste of time to produce (IMO, we already have the iPod touch guys!). If anything i could see a larger version of the iPad, not smaller.
post #3 of 62
No way. But a fun rumor, though.
post #4 of 62
I hope it is a phony rumor -- the current IPS LCD screen is bad enough in natural light. The last thing we want is a screen that will downright disappear in sunlight. Apple needs to be going in the opposite direction towards less glare and better performance in natural light.

No OLED ever, please!!!
post #5 of 62
Based on Apples App store model, another screen size doesnt make sense unless it has a weird resolution.
"There's no bigot like a religious bigot and there's no religion more fanatical than that espoused by Macintosh zealots." ~Martin Veitch, IT Week [31-01-2003]
Reply
"There's no bigot like a religious bigot and there's no religion more fanatical than that espoused by Macintosh zealots." ~Martin Veitch, IT Week [31-01-2003]
Reply
post #6 of 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ted13 View Post


No OLED ever, please!!!

That's forward thinking of you.
post #7 of 62
The current high prices likely have more to do with the recovery of R&D expenses and trying to capitalize on consumer interest. There is nothing about an OLED screen that makes them inherently expensive, in the long run they should be cheaper. In any event if you are a big enough customer even the pricing of upper end IPS tech can become competitive. In this regards Apple could get more reasonable pricing.

In any event I'm hoping for such an iPad/Touch device when the new iApods come out in September / October. That is if Apple doesn't go anal about the design. One thing it needs to have is a wide screen ratio that is HD or wider. E-Book reading is of course one use for the device but movie playback is another. Doing all the mainstream apps is important too.

If you think Apple is having a hard time with iPad production I could see demand for such a device out stripping even iPads sales. Give the unit FaceTime capabilities and a USB port and shipments would skyrocket. In this regards a FaceTime capable "pad" of this size would make for an excellent replacement for a phone in many homes. It would be manageable hand held yet capable of sitting in a dock on a desk or wall. Such a device would provide a better face time experience while being portable enough for a home or office.

We are still talking a couple of months before Apple debuts anything. However i suspect that many will be surprised at the overhaul coming to the iPod family. It is time for a major refresh to spark continued interest in the line. Plus it is about time for Apple to expand the iPhone lineup. What ever may actually happen I just expect to see surprised people.


Dave
post #8 of 62
I call BS on this.

HTC is having OLED supply issues for a few models of their phones.

Production capacity is just not there.

Anyways, I do not see Apple coming out with smaller models anyways.

Apple seems to be on the backlit LED IPS bandwagon and thats fine with me. I love both my iPhone 4 and iPad screens.

I just need a new iMac now.
post #9 of 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by antkm1 View Post

that sounds like it would be a waste of time to produce (IMO, we already have the iPod touch guys!). If anything i could see a larger version of the iPad, not smaller.

The thing is this, we are talking about a device in the range of paperback book size with the same general portability. It is this portability that will make such a device a hot seller. The idea being to be as easy to grab and pack as a paperback book. The current IPad doesn't cut it here. Niether does the Touch which is to small to be usable for extended reading sessions.

I have nothing against a bigger more capable iPad either, it is just that in this regards a smaller device serves an entirely different market. Actually several markets especially if the device comes with built in GPS. Imagine such a sized device running navigation software in a car or on the trail.



Dave
post #10 of 62
this does seem pointless, but if they do make it i hope it is i an odd ratio so i can watch all my 11:9 and 12:5 videos.

also this would be very pointless, a slightly larger itouch.... with what price range? all i can see is $400...

as for the disappearing screen, maybe apple should OFFER CHOICES (wow Apple choices!) that are:

A- not in $100 increments... 8gb flash drive to 16GB does not cost $100... 16 to 31 might depending on who they buy it from..

B- offer 3 kinds of screen IPS, OLED, and something with no glare (or an anti-glare coating)

just would seem to make more sense...

PC means personal computer.  

i have processing issues, mostly trying to get my ideas into speech and text.

if i say something confusing please tell me!

Reply

PC means personal computer.  

i have processing issues, mostly trying to get my ideas into speech and text.

if i say something confusing please tell me!

Reply
post #11 of 62
It's called an iPod Touch.
post #12 of 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ted13 View Post

I hope it is a phony rumor -- the current IPS LCD screen is bad enough in natural light. The last thing we want is a screen that will downright disappear in sunlight.

This is absolutely true, outdoor readability is very important. However that has nothing to do with OLED screens other than they could be brighter. That is not an inherent problem though. Look back in time to the original LCD & LEDS, not a pretty sight to say the least, current OLED devices are farther along right now relative to the first LCDs.
Quote:
Apple needs to be going in the opposite direction towards less glare and better performance in natural light.

I agree! However in getting there one should not rule out OLEDs or other tech for that matter.
Quote:

No OLED ever, please!!!

Let's just say you need tone more open minded here. OLEDs could be the avenue to the type of device you want. All Apple would need is a generation of devices that are bright enough. It isn't impossible and frankly is only one possibility for future devices.





Dave
post #13 of 62
But then rumours of alien abduction, imminent Verizon iPhones and other imaginary events persist too.
post #14 of 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by jawporta View Post

It's called an iPod Touch.

Not really because when it comes right down to it Touch is mostly an MP3 player with a screen to small to accel at the uses that many of us have in mind. It is about remaining portable while providing for a far more readable screen. Portable in the sense of a paperback novel.



Dave
post #15 of 62
I love it. Another product to add to the "rumored" Apple development.

I am adding this one to the list of things we will likely not see from Apple any time soon, if ever.

As for a quick upgrade to the iPad. I could see that. I think it would be something very minor though. Like adding elements to the iPad which have apparent spots built-in already. Things like a camera for FaceTime and the gyroscope. Both of which have been shown to have very likely been considered for the initial iPad release.

But an OLED iPad Mini? I don't think so.
post #16 of 62
I'd be awfully surprised to see an update to the iPad in Q4 2010 when it's almost guaranteed to do incredible Christmas numbers without an update. I think the earliest Apple will possibly update the iPad is January 2011 and the latest is March 2011. The only possible exception is if they decide to push out an update in November with iOS 4.1 - I think they'd be wasting a lot of potential Christmas sales of the current model, but I know I'd sure be happy to see iOS 4.1 and a FaceTime model in the fall instead of having to wait for next year.
post #17 of 62
There is no way that Apple will go down in size on the iPad. Maybe up to the 12 or greater inch range. They need to aim at the laptop replacement business and I don't think smaller is going to get you there.
post #18 of 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by jawporta View Post

It's called an iPod Touch.

I don't get how you people who always comment that the iPod Touch is a smaller version of the iPad actually believe that. Sure the functionality is similar but the size difference is gigantic. The screen layout is different too. An iPod Touch just can't operate as comfortably as a seven inch iPad would. The experience would be totally different.

I don't care if the newer model has an OLED screen. The IPS screen on the iPad looks good as is. A Retina Display would be better. I just want a USB connection and a card reader. If no USB then at least a card reader. I think that would make such a device much more user friendly when it comes to storing different types of data. Some card reader slots accept several types of cards. That would be better than just having an SD card reader. My HP computer has slots that can read multiple types of cards.

My preference would be for a seven inch model with a 16:9 aspect ratio.
post #19 of 62
Garbage rum or for sure.

My dream iPad would incorporate on the screen some eink type display AND a superimposed LCD of some sorts, and one could switch at will, that really would be a dream.
post #20 of 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post

The thing is this, we are talking about a device in the range of paperback book size with the same general portability. It is this portability that will make such a device a hot seller. The idea being to be as easy to grab and pack as a paperback book. The current IPad doesn't cut it here. Niether does the Touch which is to small to be usable for extended reading sessions.
I have nothing against a bigger more capable iPad either, it is just that in this regards a smaller device serves an entirely different market. Actually several markets especially if the device comes with built in GPS. Imagine such a sized device running navigation software in a car or on the trail.

Dave, I think those are two good points that could be addressed in a smaller form factor, but those are only two applications that make sence. However, i would argue that 1) the iBooks app does allow you to change the font size, and 2) the GPS feature you mention works on the iPod Touch as well, most displays on Garmin or Tom Tom's are roughly the same size as the iPod Touch screen.

If we've learned anything from Apple's strategies, it's to serve a much much larger range of applicaitons with thier devices. Apple's history of form factor is that they only do a few sizes depending on application. Sure the iPod has 4 form factor (excluding the iPHone) but they all serve a purpose. I would argue that the only real reason why the Nano is so successful is because of price. I'm quite satisfied with my classic because it can carry my entire collection; which brings the arguement back to applicability.

There has to be other compelling reasons to make a smaller form factor. Portabilty will still be an issue with a 5" or 7" screen. Not small enough for your pocket regardless.
post #21 of 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by nicolbolas View Post

this does seem pointless, but if they do make it i hope it is i an odd ratio so i can watch all my 11:9 and 12:5 videos.

also this would be very pointless, a slightly larger itouch.... with what price range? all i can see is $400...

as for the disappearing screen, maybe apple should OFFER CHOICES (wow Apple choices!) that are:

A- not in $100 increments... 8gb flash drive to 16GB does not cost $100... 16 to 31 might depending on who they buy it from..

B- offer 3 kinds of screen IPS, OLED, and something with no glare (or an anti-glare coating)

just would seem to make more sense...

Re: B - ARE YOU HIGH or something? Did you fall down and hit your head? There is NO WAY Apple would come up with 3 different models with different screens. Do you know how expensive that would be? WOW...that joke made my day.....
post #22 of 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by psychodoughboy View Post

I'd be awfully surprised to see an update to the iPad in Q4 2010 when it's almost guaranteed to do incredible Christmas numbers without an update. I think the earliest Apple will possibly update the iPad is January 2011 and the latest is March 2011. The only possible exception is if they decide to push out an update in November with iOS 4.1 - I think they'd be wasting a lot of potential Christmas sales of the current model, but I know I'd sure be happy to see iOS 4.1 and a FaceTime model in the fall instead of having to wait for next year.

Agreed. I really wish they would have done the Retina display on the iPad as another potential update, but to release a huge update this early in the game would be un-Apple like.

Look at the Gen 1 iPhone, it was missing all sorts of things that post-ers were wining that it didn't have for years (i.e. forward facing camera, video, e-Books, Enterprise applications, App organization, etc.) Some of these feature are just NOW making it to the current iPhone, 4 GENERATIONS LATER. I think we have a long wait to get some of these "must have's" into the iPad. They may speed up some features over others, but if you look at Apple's upgrade history with device releases, it's been between 3-4 years for major updates.
post #23 of 62
This rumor will prove true once all those rumors about another iPhone form-factor prove true. They've got a winner on their hands, and if it ain't broke....
post #24 of 62
What would seem logical would be to increase the screen size of the Touch, in effect making it akin to an iPad mini, helping fill the void by upping screen real estate somewhat on the Nano, not to mention bringing in touch-screen tech for that model. Let's not forget there is a rather capable product already in the same range as the Touch we all know and love as the iPhone.

I have a Touch because I didn't want to spend a small fortune maintaining an iPhone. So I have a basic cell phone that I use to make phone calls (I'm not that young so texting and the like just isn't my thing) and the Touch to do all sorts of other stuff. But I would love to see Apple bring out a larger version of the Touch because what I do with the Touch can only be enhanced by more screen real estate. The key would be to keep the increase in size modest enough to allow the new Touch to remain pocketable.

By my calculations, you could have a device sporting a screen along the lines of about 5" X 3.5" (i.e. a 6" screen) and still have a pocketable device. Up the resolution, perhaps not to retina levels at this time, to enhance the value of such a Touch for e-reading purposes and you'd have quite a decent product, one better suited to browsing, reading, gaming, data input, and media playback than the current Touch. Keep the price in line with the upper range of the current Touch but retain a Touch at the entry price similar to the current Touch but with 16GB worth of memory. Combine that with upping the ante on the Nano, not to mention the iPhone, and you've got all the bases covered.

It's such a logical next step that I have to wonder why Apple would not go that route. Consider that if Apple is serious about bringing out a variation of the iPad with a smaller screen, the price point would be virtually the same as the space occupied by the current Touch. Here in Canada the 32GB Touch is $329 and the 64GB version is $429. The iPad starts at $549 with 16GB. But move ahead into early next year when the revised iPad is released. No doubt at that point the iPad will have a base model at the same price but with 32GB. So all Apple has to do is not increase the memory on the Touch, i.e. stay at 32GB for $329 and 64GB for $429 but dramatically increase screen real estate. There would likely be few, if any complaints, if you could have a 32GB Touch with a 6" screen. Offer a 3G (4G?) version for an additional $100. The difference in screen size would be such that both products would still have their following.

The key would be to offer more screen but not so much that you'd take the Touch out of the realm of being a pocketable device. Maybe I'm wrong and the size I outline is too large for a lot of consumers. I do believe, though, that the current Touch size is dictated by the ideal size for a smartphone which is not really the same space that the Touch is occupying. If you're talking a pocketable computer as opposed to a smartphone, you can go larger because a pocketable computer doesn't wind up being placed up to your ear to make calls. It can be designed to slip into a man's pant pocket or a woman's purse or handbag. I figure a device with a 6" screen could do that but if it turns out that it would have to be a device with a 5" screen or a 4.5" screen, whatever, the fact remains that the Touch would be enhanced with more screen real estate. Once you introduce a product with a screen slotted between the current Touch and iPad, in terms of price, the Touch pricing would be where this unit would make sense.

By the way, the iPhone has a resolution of 960X640 whereas the Touch right now is as 480X320. If you go from a 3.5" screen to let's say a 5" screen, you have less than doubled screen real estate, meaning that if the new Touch went to 960X640, the net result would be higher perceived resolution. Or you could opt for the same resolution as the iPad which is 1,024X768 which would further up the ante in terms of resolution on the new Touch. Who wouldn't welcome a Touch with a larger, high-resolution screen that you could still slip into your pant pocket. I don't see a downside.
post #25 of 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post

Not really because when it comes right down to it Touch is mostly an MP3 player with a screen to small to accel at the uses that many of us have in mind. It is about remaining portable while providing for a far more readable screen. Portable in the sense of a paperback novel.



Dave

No, it is mostly an MP4 player, get your codecs correct.
post #26 of 62
It doesn't makes sense to switch to OLED technology. I expect however that Apple decides to release a Retina Display iPad in the near future.

In fact if we take iPhone 4 screen dimensions and resolution and double them, keeping the same dpi, we get the following:
  • A 6" x 4" screen
  • Meassuring 7.2" diagonal
  • At Full HD resolution (1920x1080 @ same iPhone 4 dpi)

This makes more sense to me (and would actually a dream come true). It would make the iPad more easy to handle (smaller) and the same awesome dot pitch as iPhone 4 Retina Display.
post #27 of 62
Total nonsense.
post #28 of 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by jawporta View Post

It's called an iPod Touch.

I agree. So *if* this rumor is true it means the iPod Touch will be discontinued and replaced with an expanded range of iPads.
post #29 of 62
It seems like a crazy rumor, but it may turn on more people if the smaller versions' price is right.
iPad News, App Reviews, and More: iPadNewsUpdates.com
Reply
iPad News, App Reviews, and More: iPadNewsUpdates.com
Reply
post #30 of 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by ascii View Post

I agree. So *if* this rumor is true it means the iPod Touch will be discontinued and replaced with an expanded range of iPads.

That's not necessarily the case. Keep the Touch name but develop it more along the lines of a pocketable computer than a smartphone minus the phone. In addition, retain one model at a bargain price with minor tweaks (more memory), something Apple has done in the past with it's iPod line (ala the iPod Classic).

Initially Apple was worried about being cost effective, hence they were working with a Touch that shared hardware with the iPhone. Economies of scale and all that sort of stuff. Something similar is taking place with the Mac Mini, a desktop sharing hardware with a laptop model.

But as we've seen with the introduction of the iPad, clearly there is a big enough market for touchscreen devices to allow for a range of products filling different niches. Time for the Touch to be set free from smartphone constraints. Can't remember the last time I put my Touch up to my ear to make a call, hence size doesn't have to be limited to what makes sense in a phone.

Apple has changed specs on devices before yet retained the same name, so why would there be a need to call a significantly revised device something other than a Touch?

By the way, regarding OLED, not going to happen. IPS LCD for sure.
post #31 of 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post

Not really because when it comes right down to it Touch is mostly an MP3 player with a screen to small to accel at the uses that many of us have in mind. It is about remaining portable while providing for a far more readable screen. Portable in the sense of a paperback novel.

Well, the iPod Touch is also not a small iPad because it doesn't run iPad software. I don't see the point of a device in between in size. It would offer none of the advantages of either and the disadvantages of both, and, frankly, I don't think either UI would be suitable.
post #32 of 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

Well, the iPod Touch is also not a small iPad because it doesn't run iPad software. I don't see the point of a device in between in size. It would offer none of the advantages of either and the disadvantages of both, and, frankly, I don't think either UI would be suitable.

And how difficult would it be to introduce a Touch model running iPad software. Give the device a screen resolution identical to the iPad and you've got an excellent high-res unit well suited to what people use the Touch for right now. Granted, some functions would be less enjoyable on the Touch than on the iPad but not many. Reading, media playback, gaming, browsing would be fine on the revised Touch with only minor sizing adjustments that could be easily built into the software.

Seems to me that if the iPad can run software designed for the Touch it would not be a stretch for a device in between the current Touch and iPad to run software designed for the iPad. Certainly the hurdles would not be so extreme as to be beyond Apple's software expertise to master.
post #33 of 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by psychodoughboy View Post

I'd be awfully surprised to see an update to the iPad in Q4 2010 when it's almost guaranteed to do incredible Christmas numbers without an update...

True, but the iPod touch is due for an update soon. In the past, it made sense for Apple to keep the iPhone and touch the same size. They needed to keep the resolution the same for the sake of the apps, and if they made the touch any bigger but kept the same resolution it would be a pretty bad display (really big pixels).

But now Apple could make the touch a little bigger, keep the same resolution as the iPhone (or the iPad if they want to match that aspect ratio) and still have a high density ppi for good image quality. So instead of the 960x640/326 ppi display of the iPhone the touch could have a 960x640/275 ppi and be a little bigger. There'd be no impact to the apps or developers whatsoever because the resolution is the same.
post #34 of 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carmissimo View Post

And how difficult would it be to introduce a Touch model running iPad software. Give the device a screen resolution identical to the iPad and you've got an excellent high-res unit well suited to what people use the Touch for right now. Granted, some functions would be less enjoyable on the Touch than on the iPad but not many. Reading, media playback, gaming, browsing would be fine on the revised Touch with only minor sizing adjustments that could be easily built into the software.

Seems to me that if the iPad can run software designed for the Touch it would not be a stretch for a device in between the current Touch and iPad to run software designed for the iPad. Certainly the hurdles would not be so extreme as to be beyond Apple's software expertise to master.

Well, the issue with keeping the same resolution on a smaller screen is that app UIs are now, in many cases, designed for a certain physical size screen in the sense that a finger is a fixed size and control spacing is accommodated to that, and also as to what is readable in a certain area. Yes, the UI would display correctly on a smaller screen of higher resolution, but usability would likely be negatively impacted in many cases.
post #35 of 62
I call Bullshit on these rumors.

I thought I had just read a Microsoft article what with the 34 or so SKUs listed.

"And we're going to have a West Coast version, like a Cal King bed, that's 5.6" by 12.9", and also a Mexican version that's 1.4" by 35.1"," said a gesticulating Steve Ballmer at the Microsoft Partner Conference. "And wait until you see the ones with the foldable slideout keyboard with a 53-in-1 card reader and 17 USB ports. You asked, we listened!

"Oh, and one more thing: we're bringing back the floppy disk drive! We know some of you still have Microsoft Word 5 on 23 floppy disks, and we don't want to leave those of you in the dark."
post #36 of 62
Looking at my 13" MBP display I can see the next iPad being about the 13" size.

That opens the door for more detailed use (like imaging in medicine or better presentations of drafting papers.)

Smaller only counts if there is a major reduction in costs and the iPod touch is working well for that market.
Ken
Reply
Ken
Reply
post #37 of 62
Don't buy the rumors either when OLED is worse in sunlight and smaller Ipads would be more portable.

Apple ain't the company to make a many versions of its products either.


Before more ipads Apple should make a non-smartphone iphone for the market that doesn't want or can't afford a data plan.

Phone, addressbook syncing, ipod, texting and camera with no 3g and no wi-fi. Smaller cheaper form factor.
post #38 of 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by msantti View Post


Anyways, I do not see Apple coming out with smaller models anyways.

Coming out with??:?? but they already have.

Remember the ipad is "just a big ipod touch"
post #39 of 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ted13 View Post

I hope it is a phony rumor -- the current IPS LCD screen is bad enough in natural light. The last thing we want is a screen that will downright disappear in sunlight. Apple needs to be going in the opposite direction towards less glare and better performance in natural light.

OLED disappears in sunlight? Hyperbole much? Sure, it's harder to see, but so are most display technologies. You really have to crank them up. Pixel Qi seems pretty interesting, I don't know if the colors are as good outside of direct sunlight.

Quote:
No OLED ever, please!!!

That's a pretty myopic statement, it assumes technologies don't improve.

Quote:
Originally Posted by antkm1 View Post

that sounds like it would be a waste of time to produce (IMO, we already have the iPod touch guys!). If anything i could see a larger version of the iPad, not smaller.

For tablet use, it seems that the Touch and iPad are outside my ideal zone. There is a huge difference between a 3.5" and 7" screen. iPad's screen is a bit large to do thumb typing, I think 7" would be fine.

Quote:
Originally Posted by nicolbolas View Post

this does seem pointless, but if they do make it i hope it is i an odd ratio so i can watch all my 11:9 and 12:5 videos.

I hope that's a typo, what is in 11:9 that couldn't be reasonably well-served with a 4:3 screen? As for widescreen, I think it's a bad idea to have a general purpose device whose screen is optimized for one use but very poor for several other uses. I thought that 3:2 was a good balance, too bad they didn't do that with the iPad.

Quote:
as for the disappearing screen, maybe apple should OFFER CHOICES (wow Apple choices!) that are:

B- offer 3 kinds of screen IPS, OLED, and something with no glare (or an anti-glare coating)

Such a variety of choices would mean you would need something build to order.
post #40 of 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post

For tablet use, it seems that the Touch and iPad are outside my ideal zone. There is a huge difference between a 3.5" and 7" screen. iPad's screen is a bit large to do thumb typing, I think 7" would be fine.

Yes, typing on the iPad is my #1 issue with the device. If you're on the couch or in a chair with no surface (other than your legs), typing sucks. The device slides around on your lap and is too low in your lap to comfortably type, one-hand typing is just not efficient, and the screen to face angle is uncomfortable. I tried one out for a day (a friend let me borrow his) and i found that anything other than twitter-style typing was just too compromising on a couch or in a coffee shop (or similar situations where you have no surface to place the device and the keyboard accessory is not present). Apple or other manufacturers need to address this somehow. Apple's keyboard accessory might work but not in your lap, and it only works in portrait mode anyway. There is one Manuf. that has this in the works, but i have yet to see a release yet.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPad
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › Rumors of smaller Apple iPad models with OLED screens persist