Rumors of smaller Apple iPad models with OLED screens persist - Page 2

I use the Apple case and have no problem typing in my lap, in landscape (excellent, especially when angled) or portrait (good). One handed typing is not ideal, but I haven't had occassion to need to input large amounts of text while standing. Yeah, I know, we can get into the whole, "you shouldn't need a case," thing, a la iP4, but it's a pretty nice case that protects the screen when not in use and is actually quite functional.

First off I think Apple will keep the iPad on a 6 month or so rev cycle much in the same way as they do the laptops. It is the only way to remain competitive with the competition which will be working very hard to capture some of Apples success. So I could see an iPad rev anytime after September with the goal of keeping the iPad new for the Christmas shopping season.

Second it is obvious that Apple has an easy upgrade path for the iPad with the 512MB A4 implementation in iPhone 4. Since the lack of RAM is the single greatest shortcoming of the iPad it is a no brainer to update the device as soon as possible. Even if that is the only thing changed in the device it will be a major improvement and would assure continued strong sales of the iPad through the Holidays. next year Apple could then give the iPad a cortex A9 processor that would really improve the unit.

This is all about the current iPad. Additional models are also a given as the concept is a winner.

Dave

There are actually a number of good uses for such a sized device. Portable gaming shouldn't be dismissed either. As to GPS, there is no denying that a bigger screen is a huge advantage in moving vehicles.

As to font size i have a number of books on my 3G iPhone and to be perfectly honest what sucks here is the screen size. Sure you can zoom the text but that just makes reading more of a chore. Really what you want to see in a device suitable for E-Reading is a full page of text just as you would in a book. My opinion of E-Book reading on my iPhone has developed around a great deal of dissatisfaction most of which is due directly to the cramped screen.

Exactly! It is the applications for a device this size that will drive demand for the product.

Then you are out of touch! Seriously read what you have said, there is a huge or was anyways, demand for the Nano because of size and simplicity of use. Same goes for the shuffle, it is a device that serves a different need form the Nano or the other iPod members.

This is a total non argument. I can get paper back books that fit fine in my pocket or so thick that I can't even get half of them in any of my pockets. That doesn't stop people form carrying the thick ones around for casual reading. In any event with the right aspect ratio the device could fit into enough pockets that it would indeed be seen as a very portable device. Not to mention is the heavier outer wear many of us have to wear half the year and the fat pockets available there.

In the end I just don't think your imagination is properly sizing the object in your mind and thus biasing your opinion in a negative way. My suggestion would be to get out a ruler, some cardboard and a knife and make yourself a few mock ups. Devices in this range would be extremely handy to say the least.

Dave

Certainly it would seem easier to go with the iPhone's resolution but with a larger screen than to take the iPad's resolution and apply it to a smaller one. I'm no expert in what's involved but I would imagine that if the iPad can run a lot of programs designed for the Touch with very little modification, it would be easy enough to have the Touch run those same programs considering it would be less significant a leap. And if developers have been quick to bring to market multiple versions or their software, one for the iPhone/Touch and another for the iPad, I doubt adding a third variation, where needed, would be a daunting task.

I can't imagine that a program designed to run on an iPhone would be difficult to use applied to a device with a somewhat larger screen, otherwise the iPad couldn't have been suited to running many of those same programs at launch. And consider that from a developer's point of view, if the iPhone has a specific resolution and the larger Touch was identical in resolution, in a lot of cases there would be no need whatsoever to produce different versions.

If Apple can't build the current version of the iPad fast enough to meet demand, what incentive is there for releasing a revised version as early as September. As for doing it to stay ahead of the competition, right now I'd have to say what competition? I doubt we'll see anything close to a competitor for the next several months if not for all of 2010. It would make a lot more sense to wait until the first quarter of 2011 to bring out a new version hence forcing competitors to guess what Apple has planned next. Rival tablets might just come to market at the end of 2010 that may or may not up the ante but even if that happens, Apple gets to respond a couple of months later. Apple has a lead of at least a year and should be able to maintain that edge without resorting to a six-month refresh schedule.

I never dismissed anything about gaming, ok, that's 3 applications you mentioned, still not convinced a smaller form factor is worth the engineering to sell it. oh, and check this link out...too funny. I guess screen size isn't as important as form factor
https://buy.garmin.com/shop/shop.do?...rue#featureTab


I have to laugh at this...dude, is tapping the screen with your thumb (in one hand) really so cumbersome as to detract you from reading on the iPHone? Talk about out of touch, wow...that's pure laziness. I'm not discounting the fact that the iPhone has a small screen, i'm just saying that it does an adequete job on the go. Otherwise, the iPad is what you really need.


Again, name more than 3 that don't already work well in either the Touch or the iPad.

The iPod Shuffle was my first iPod purchase, and i loved it because it doubled as a USB thumb drive, and i could use it in the car with an FM transmitter. Now, it's just a fancy, over priced lapel pin. now you need the dock to do anything other than playing it and the lack of play/pause/next and back buttons makes it totally pointless for anything but working out. I hold to my arguement that the Nano is so popular because of price, that's it. I bought the iPod Mini because of price ($199)...i really wanted to get the 60 gig color version (Gen 5), but the price was too high at the time, then i kicked myself because i didn't splurge for more storage. I believe that's waht a lot of people do. Had i got the iPod Video back then, i probably would still be using it today...then only thing i was out of touch with, was how much use i'd get out of my iPod and wished i would have saved myself $300 from the shuffle and mini purchases and just got the standard iPod from the begining.

No, it's a good arguement if by pocket you mean your jeans or khaki pants pocket. Sure a paperback will fit in most coat pockets, but that's not my arguement and I don't believe that was the arguement you were initially making (but your clarification is welcomed). Ok, that's 4 uses for this form factor than has yet to convince me that a smaller iPad is worth the effort to Apple. Keep going, i'm just about 1% there to seeing your arguement.

My imagination? architects have more imagination than many other professions out there. Yes, its like holding a 1/2 size letter note pad in your hand. I use them every day at work for making thumbnail sketches and taking notes (something the current ipad cannot do easily might i add). I just don't see how that form factor is any better than the current iPad. Honestly, i think you're trying to start some iPad Nano thread, because you don't want to fork over the $500+ on an iPad, that's just going nowhere. Sure the current iPad (IMO) is too expensive to be the "revolutionary, magical accessory" that SJ dreams of, but that's no reason to start heated arguements over fictitious form factors.

Another screen size makes perfect sense.
Another resolution does not.

Apple could introduce an iPad nano with the exact same 1024x768 resolution.
The advantages would be...
1. Existing iPad software runs unmodified.
2. Small pixels = better reading experience.
3. More portable.
4. Easier data entry!*****

I love the iPad, but I feel its biggest weakness is the onscreen keyboard.
I love the keyboard on the iPhone and can type crazy fast with it.
On the iPad I can only type at about 30-50% of full speed.

Maybe this is the new iPod Touch rather than the mini-iPad? A 5.6 inch iPod Touch would be as portable as a book, as good a reader and a good car navigation device. And the size works. Just look at the Dell Streak. And if Apple thinks it's a good idea, it could differentiate the iPod from the iPhone. The bigger screen essentially focuses the iPod as a MID, while the slightly smaller screen remains a good choice for smartphones. Larger than 3.5in might actually be a good choice for a MID that's not a smartphone.

Here's a Dell Streak screen size comparison vs. a Nexus One:

http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget....av06042010.jpg

Keeping in mind that the iPhone is even smaller than a Nexus One, it would seem to me that a slightly larger iPod Touch would have huge improvements in functionality without necessarily sacrificing portability.

Also don't forget that iOS 4 will be available for iPads this fall and that will lead to a flurry of media coverage, new apps & new capabilities. I don't think Apple is going to update the iPad any time soon.

Apple also like to do annual release cycles.

iPods in September/October (last 5 years)
iPhones in June/July (last 4 years)
iPads will probably continue to be released every April/May as it was this year.

I also think a more iPad-like unibody aluminum enclosure would be great for the next generation iPod touch.

$199 = 16GB 3rd Gen iPod Touch (last years model) 480x320
$299 = 32GB 4th Gen iPod Touch 3.5" Retina Dispaly 960x640
$399 = 64GB 4th Gen iPod Touch Extreme 5.6" Dispaly 960x640
$499-830 1st Gen iPad 9.7" Dispaly 1024x768

SMALLER IPAD
LARGER I POD TOUCH
NANO PHONE W. VIDEO FACE ON BOARD
4 MORE N A SERVER FARMS BUILT SOON ENOUGH
MAKING APPLE CLOUDS STRONG > NO MATTER WHAT IT CLOUD NEEDS ARE OR MAY BE


I TUNES WILL HIT 150 MILLIONS USERS SOON

IPAD
IPHONE
ITOUCH
IMAC
ALL ARE SUCKING DOWN DATA POWER and will only increase as time goes by.



I SEE APPLE becoming a gatekeeper carrier
doing voice wifi and video . with or with out the big telco's

a nano phone is coming 3rd
after a larger touch and a smaller pad

apple at 150 is a strong buy

go apple

peace

9

Let's face it, as cool a device as the Touch might be, there are many functions that demand more real estate to work conveniently. Gaming is OK on the small device and reading is manageable. But browsing, come on now, it's a stretch to claim the current Touch is a great browser. It's a very good browser considering its size but in absolute terms browsing on the Touch is a pain in the derriere. Gaming would be even better with a larger screen and reading dramatically enhanced. Watching media, well, who among us would complain about the screen size increasing.

Isn't this really about retaining the convenience of a pocketable device? The Touch is just shy of 2.5" at its narrowest. The wallet I'm currently using checks in at 3.5". If a bulky, thick wallet 3.5" wide slips into a man's pocket with no issues, where is it written that the Touch has to remain no wider than its current 2.5".

The size of the Touch is not dictated by what's pocketable or by what is optimal for performing the tasks it's most often used for. It's dictated by it sharing a screen with a smartphone. It's the smartphone that one wouldn't want to see any larger than the current Touch/iPhone form factor on account of you have to put a smartphone up to your ear to make calls and who would want a larger device when performing that function.

Seems to me that when Apple makes the Touch so that it can share components with the iPhone, it's really doing far more compromising than we should be stuck with. My view on this is that the Touch should be a pocketable computer and sized accordingly. It shouldn't be stuck with a smartphone form factor because Apple wants to make a larger profit via economies of scale.

Up to this point Apple got away with what it was doing because, well, there really was nothing available that was remotely an alternative to the Touch. But Apple itself has opened a lot of eyes with the iPad, which demonstrates just how transformative additional screen real estate can be in a hand-held touch-screen device. There is a place, though, for something pocketable yet less crippled than the current Touch. I'm talking a unit that forces fewer compromises upon us yet retains just enough portability to be an ideal unit to be taking with you on the go. There are lots of situations for which the iPad is not suited. A pocketable Touch would ideally slot in there. At the very least even a modest increase in the Touch's screen real estate would improve the product with no downside. I think there would be an ideal size, one that offers a good blend of portability and screen real estate, which I trust Apple designers could determine. That size, to me, should be the target, not automatically just using the same parts as are found in the iPhone which has a different set of requirements.

I see it slightly differently. If they go with a larger screen I don't think they'll keep the 3.5in screen around. Really, that was there for so long because of the need to keep apps compatible with the iPhone. But now that iOS scales, they don't need to keep the same size. 3.5inches is really too small in my opinion for a media Internet device (MID). Smarthphones are pushing 4 inches these days and nobody seems to be complaining about portability. So a 5.6inch tablet is hardly out of the question. Though I could be wrong and maybe (assuming all of these rumours are true) keep the 3.5inch size too, if they think they need another size.

So maybe a similar price structure, a single larger screen size (5.6inch) and two price points for memory options and/or more price points for 3G options?

As for the retina display, that'll only happen if they keep the same size. I can't see them keeping the retina display for a 5.6inch device. And I even wonder if Apple would want that much differentiation in the same product line (retina display on 3.5inch and none on 5.6inch).

If anybody wants to see the portability of a 5 inch+ device, watch Engadget's review of the streak. They discuss the size issue. And the reviewer pulls the Streak out of his pants pocket (around 9:30):

http://www.viddler.com/explore/engad...os/1490/1.536:

http://www.engadget.com/2010/06/06/dell-streak-review/

That's close to what I could imagine them doing but I'm not sure what the point would be of having the $299 version with a 3.5" display, retina or otherwise. Seems more logical to make the $299 model with the 5.6" 960X640 display used in the $399 model. The $299 version would be a hard sell sandwiched between the other two variations if it came with the same size screen as the entry-level version, even if the resolution was dramatically better.

A bigger iPod Touch would likely work better than a small iPad, in terms of how well software already developed for would work on it. But, I'd still bet that we won't see a device sized between the iPhone/iPod Touch and the iPad.

Why?

It makes sense. It doesn't take Steve Jobs to figure out browsing, reading, playing games, watching video, composing e-mails, managing a calendar, and so on and so on, is enhanced by making a Touch with a bigger screen. The only downside would be if the resulting product ceased to be pocketable. That's the limitation. I don't think the current Touch form factor is the limit to how big a genuinely pocketable device can be.

Now factor in that Apple has upped the resolution ante by introducing a smartphone with a native resolution of 960X640. I'll bet it's cheaper to make a larger screen with that same resolution because you're dealing with lower pixel density. Yet, a screen not quite double the size of the iPhone's Retina display would still be one sporting an impressive resolution at 960X640. And the software designed for the iPhone would seamlessly scale up to the larger Touch.

Perhaps you're right and Apple does come out with a Touch that incorporates a lot of the innovations from the new iPhone, including the cameras and the Retina display. But it's not really the next logical step for that device, not as far as I can tell.

Apple updates their notebooks on about a eight to nine month cycle. Their updates are partly limited by availability of new chip designs and ample supply. They don't have that kind of limitation with the iDevices, they can specify all of the parts ahead of time and even have big parts custom made rather than worry about Intel's product cycle. So far, all the iDevice series are on a roughly annual update, except Shuffle, which is updated about every two years.


You should be able to use any Bluetooth keyboard, which should be usable in portrait and landscape. It still leaves the issue of a stand.

methane seas is right...i'm not going to even post the quote, just that you wrote it...
you just post the same crap all the time. Someone needs to ban you.

that doesn't solve the problem.
Imagine a couch, then putting your feet up and relaxing with a nice iPad in your lap. Then suddenly, you get an email. From your girlfriend wondering what you want to do this weekend...you want to reply but can't because you'd have to contort yourself into some crazy carpal-tunnel position to type. Oh, well, better get up and go into the office where you can type comfortably.

They wouldn't want to make yet another version of Mail, Calendar etc. for a mid-sized screen. Maybe it will be the same res as the Retina display but 4 times bigger.

Four times bigger would mean a Touch significantly larger than an iPad with much worse resolution. A larger touch would be something less than twice the size of an iPhone. As such the scaling would work just fine and Apple wouldn't have to make yet another version of anything.

Altering the size of the Touch screen is not the big deal some think it is in terms of software. There would be a lot more work required to change the form factor because the device would require a distinct enclosure, as well as a unique-to-Touch screen. Then again, Apple makes different sizes of laptops, three flavours of desktop computer and already has four flavours of iPod. What would be the big deal of conjuring up one more form factor? It's not like the sales volume is lacking.

It would be so easy for Apple to simply up the ante by altering screen dimensions on the next Touch considering Apple has done that sort of thing on numerous other occasions. Let's remember that the update last September was remarkably modest so a major overhaul of the Touch would certainly be due. I don't imagine that Apple would even present the revised product as iPad mini. They'd get Jobs to talk about the exciting changes to the Touch, more this, more that, more screen, just gorgeous, blah, blah, blah. Apple has always evolved products, taking them in stages to innovative places. Let's not forget that the iPod started out life as a basic MP3 player. That we'd wind up with a pocket computer, shouldn't surprise anyone. That such a pocket computer would wind up with a screen large enough to enhance the user experience, that too, shouldn't surprise anyone when it happens, be it September 2010 or September 2011, 2012 or whatever.

Because everyone knows that the lack of RAM is a serious issue with iOS 4.0. By everyone I mean Apples engineers, Apple management, the competition the app developers and iDevice users. So the number one issue is that an iPad rev is needed simply to support the promised upgrade to 4.x iOS. Please don't misunderstand iOS 4.x will run on the existing iPad when it comes but the experience will be sub optimal.

The second issue revolves around apps. There simply isn't enough RAM to deliver the functionality that many want. Reving the iPads RAM is a simple way to assure that things like iWork can be fully utilized.

Third iPhone 4 makes it pretty obvious that the hardware can be had now. As more and more people realize this they will begin to question why iPad is crippled.

Fourth the competition isn't sitting still. They know exactly what they need to compete against and RAM is one point easy to get peoples attention with. People discount the competition but with Apple moving over two million a month they will act aggressively to caputure some of that market.

Fifth even if they skip updates every six months they will likely want to move iPad releases to align with the rest of the iDevices. So iPad would get some sort of bump with the iDecices in September or October. From then on annual updates would happen around the same time.

Sixth iPad is a wonderful first effort but it seems pretty obvious that somethings have been deleted in the first rev. The gyro is one item and I believe RAM was another. Like all computers iPad is a work in progress and I don't believe they have meet all their goals for this model.

Seventh any Touch or similar device released in September/ October will likely have the same A4 as seen in iPhone. Dies Apple want the shipping iPad to have less RAM than the Touch or for that matter an equal amount?

That could be true but do you think HP, Dell or any of the new comers will want to see all the holiday shopping dollars go to Apple? I'm not saying they will make it but if they don't have pre November releases targeted they are rather foolish.

A major rev in 2011 isn't prevented Nya memory tweak in the fall of this year. However that major rev might take awhile. Especially if it is an A9 SMP based platform. The fall rev is simply a stop gap measure that shores up the platform for a few months.


The strategy doesn't have to be six months forever. It is however needed now. They need to keep momentum and they need to keep the platform pleasant to operate with the coming iOS upgrade. This will help them hold off the competition when it materializes.

The key here is my belief that iOS 4.x on the iPad wil be kinda sucky withou more RAM.