or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › CDMA iPhone, AMD-powered Apple TV with iOS, 7-inch iPad rumored
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

CDMA iPhone, AMD-powered Apple TV with iOS, 7-inch iPad rumored

post #1 of 208
Thread Starter 
Overseas component suppliers have started rumors of a number of new products coming from Apple in the next year, including a new Apple TV running iOS and powered by AMD Fusion, a 7-inch iPad, a CDMA iPhone, and a new 9.7-inch iPad with a Cortex-A9 processor and 512MB of RAM in 2011.

Taiwanese industry publication DigiTimes on Monday reported a lengthy list of potential future hardware from Apple. It made mention of a Verizon-compatible CDMA iPhone expected to start production in December, piggybacking on rumors that resurfaced over the weekend, claiming the iPhone 4 will debut on the Verizon network in the U.S. in January 2011.

"Pegatron is expected to start mass production in December and will supply to both US-based Verizon Wireless and China-based China Telecom," the report said. "The CDMA iPhone's back plate will be forged from metal materials and will feature an integrated antenna."

Sources also indicated to the publication that Apple will upgrade its 9.7-inch iPad to an ARM Cortex-A9-based processor, and also add 512MB of RAM in the first quarter of 2011. The current model has 256MB or RAM and a custom A4 processor based on the Cortex-A8 design.

The report also rekindled rumors of a smaller iPad with a 7-inch screen. The report claimed that the hardware will also sport a Cortex-A9-based processor, and like the 9.7-inch model, will have an LCD panel with in-plane switching technology and a resolution of 1,024-by-768 pixels.

Finally, the report also claimed that the Cupertino, Calif., company is working on a new Apple TV powered by AMD's Fusion package, dubbed an "accelerated processing unit," or APU. AMD's yet-to-be-released hybrid processor combines the CPU and GPU functions into one package. The ARM-based chips found in Apple's iPhone and iPad already accomplish similar functions with low power consumption.

AMD touts that its forthcoming Fusion product will offer strong HD, 3D and data-intensive performance on the single-die processor. "APUs combine high-performance serial and parallel processing cores with other special-purpose hardware accelerators, enabling breakthroughs in visual computing, security, performance-per-watt and device form factor," the company said.

DigiTimes claimed that the new Apple TV will "adopt a user interface similar to the iPhone with support for social networking websites, network multimedia and the App Store. Mass production of the device will start in December."

Aside from the inclusion of an AMD processor, the rumors largely reiterate what was stated in May by Engadget. That report indicated that Apple would release a new product that would offer 1080P cloud-based content streaming for just $99. However, it indicated that the device would run on a custom-built A4 processor, just like the iPad and iPhone 4.
post #2 of 208
I don't understand the need for a smaller iPad...
post #3 of 208
How exactly would iOS work on apple TV? It's a completely different category of device to iPhone, iPod Touch & iPad.
post #4 of 208
Quote:
Originally Posted by GaspinRasputin View Post

I don't understand the need for a smaller iPad...

lighter, easier to hold and read books.

If it's cheaper its something I would buy.
post #5 of 208
Quote:
Originally Posted by GaspinRasputin View Post

I don't understand the need for a smaller iPad...

Neither do I, 9.7 inches feels perfect for a tablet and anyone who needs a pocketable device should get an iPod Touch or iPhone.
post #6 of 208
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

The report also rekindled rumors of a smaller iPad with a 7-inch screen. The report claimed that the hardware will also sport a Cortex-A9-based processor, and like the 9.7-inch model, will have an LCD panel with in-plane switching technology and a resolution of 1,024-by-768 pixels.

Finally, the report also claimed that the Cupertino, Calif., company is working on a new Apple TV powered by AMD's Fusion package, dubbed an "accelerated processing unit," or APU.

Wow. A shame my Samsung TV is to new (and to good) to replace. But in a few years...
Another useful addition would be a bigger iPad with a 14.6-inch screen (A4).
post #7 of 208
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe hs View Post

How exactly would iOS work on apple TV? It's a completely different category of device to iPhone, iPod Touch & iPad.

My thought exactly. Not only UI wise (touch interface), but the underlying architecture (ARM vs x86) is all different too.
post #8 of 208
Quote:
Originally Posted by GaspinRasputin View Post

I don't understand the need for a smaller iPad...

Different needs for different people. Your individual usage case isn't the only valid one; you are not the center of the universe. If Apple feels there is a large enough market for a smaller iPad, it is likely they will pursue it.

Plus, the smaller iPad would likely be cheaper. It has been widely reported that price has been a big barrier to iPad adoption.
post #9 of 208
Of all of these, the 7" iPad seems the least probable.

I'm an iPhone/iPad developer, so I have some experience with what's involved in programming these things. One of the key differences between iPhone and say, Android is that iOS has no real provision for automatically supporting different screen sizes.

Porting from iPhone to iPad means redesigning your interface for a different screen size and aspect ratio. This isn't automatic - it requires a complete manual redesign of each screen. You'll notice that most iPad buttons aren't twice the size of iPhone ones - they aren't scaled up - they are still exactly the right size for your finger, they're just further apart. (I'm talking about native iPad apps, not upscaled iPhone apps and I'm referring to buttons on modals and tab bars not the keyboard).

Supporting the retina display is simpler because switching image sizes works automatically but that's only possible because the retina display is exactly double the resolution of the 3GS and the screen is the same size. If the screen were bigger or smaller or the pixels weren't an exact multiple of the 3GS then that would have to be done manually as well.

So consider this, if the iPad buttons are the correct size for your finger on a 10" iPad then what happens when you reduce the screen size? If you downscale everything then the buttons will be too small to touch accurately. If you keep them the same size then you break the layout. This can't be done automatically - developers will have to update their apps.

So maybe Apple will just expect developers to update their apps - it wouldn't be the first time. But it would seem a bit strange after launching the iPad only a few months ago to suddenly release an update that breaks half the existing apps. And if Apple knew this was coming you would think there'd be some hint in the developer documentation, like "don't design your apps for a fixed screen size" or "make sure the buttons in your iPad interfaces are a bit bigger than they need to be".
"There's no chance that the iPhone is going to get any significant market share. No chance" - Steve Ballmer
Reply
"There's no chance that the iPhone is going to get any significant market share. No chance" - Steve Ballmer
Reply
post #10 of 208
Quote:
Originally Posted by jnjnjn View Post

Wow. A shame my Samsung TV is to new (and to good) to replace. But in a few years...
Another useful addition would be a bigger iPad with a 14.6-inch screen (A4).

15"??? I think 10" is big enough
iPhone 4 32GB (black), iPod touch 32GB, iPad Wi-Fi + 3G 64GB, iPod classic 80 GB (white) 160GB (black), 2x 5th gen iPod 30GB (black + white), iMac 27", MacBook Pro 17", Time Capsule 1TB, Apple TV
Reply
iPhone 4 32GB (black), iPod touch 32GB, iPad Wi-Fi + 3G 64GB, iPod classic 80 GB (white) 160GB (black), 2x 5th gen iPod 30GB (black + white), iMac 27", MacBook Pro 17", Time Capsule 1TB, Apple TV
Reply
post #11 of 208
Quote:
Originally Posted by GaspinRasputin View Post

I don't understand the need for a smaller iPad...

To give the trolls more to troll about.

Seriously, for some, size matters. And as women will admit, "Give us more choices." Unfortunately, the more choices one has, the longer it takes to make a decision.

I personally am pleased that Apple limits its offerings, because it helps ensure they will remain at the top of customer satisfaction surveys providing service and support for their innovations.

On the other hand, I have recently started to hope that Apple widens its scope and 'just takes over the world.' Life is short and at my stage in life, I am selfish enough to want to enjoy it, and to hell what others think.
post #12 of 208
Quote:
Originally Posted by cvaldes1831 View Post

Different needs for different people. Your individual usage case isn't the only valid one; you are not the center of the universe. If Apple feels there is a large enough market for a smaller iPad, it is likely they will pursue it.

Plus, the smaller iPad would likely be cheaper. It has been widely reported that price has been a big barrier to iPad adoption.

Don't see it and yes I know I'm not the center of the universe. Smaller cheaper? iPod Touch comes to mind. Just doesn't seem like there's a whole lot gained or lost whichever is the case by a 7" model that isn't already met by the iPod Touch or the iPad at its current configuration.
post #13 of 208
Or maybe Disney buys Verizon - right about the time the are almost done converting to LTE - just to finally put a rest to anyone ever expecting a CDMA iPhone. or not.
post #14 of 208
I just don't see how the hell that would work in...
iPhone 4 32GB (black), iPod touch 32GB, iPad Wi-Fi + 3G 64GB, iPod classic 80 GB (white) 160GB (black), 2x 5th gen iPod 30GB (black + white), iMac 27", MacBook Pro 17", Time Capsule 1TB, Apple TV
Reply
iPhone 4 32GB (black), iPod touch 32GB, iPad Wi-Fi + 3G 64GB, iPod classic 80 GB (white) 160GB (black), 2x 5th gen iPod 30GB (black + white), iMac 27", MacBook Pro 17", Time Capsule 1TB, Apple TV
Reply
post #15 of 208
Quote:
Originally Posted by GaspinRasputin View Post

I don't understand the need for a smaller iPad...

Agreed. Seems to me a larger Touch would make a lot more sense. Something along the lines of a 5" Touch. Still small enough to fit into a lot of pockets but a larger screen would allow it to be better suited to being used as a reader, display device, gaming platform, browser etc.

The 7" iPad would be less enjoyable to use than the current iPad and yet not offer any more portability. It would be easier to handle but at a heavy cost considering the loss of valuable screen real estate and you would not have the ability to slip it into a pocket ala the Touch.

Make the Touch a little larger, on the other hand, and many of the advantages of having a 7" iPad would be there (though not to the same degree) without losing the ability to pocket the device.

I can't imagine Apple going with both in that the price point of the 7" iPad and the larger Touch would be similar.

If you're not going to have a device that you can slip into your pocket, reducing screen real estate is pretty much pointless. You lose the enjoyment that comes from working with a generously sized screen with a marginal weight gain and modest price reduction to show for it. Not a worthwhile trade-off.
post #16 of 208
Quote:
Originally Posted by Socrates View Post

Of all of these, the 7" iPad seems the least probable.

I'm an iPhone/iPad developer, so I have some experience with what's involved in programming these things. One of the key differences between iPhone and say, Android is that iOS has no real provision for automatically supporting different screen sizes.

Porting from iPhone to iPad means redesigning your interface for a different screen size and aspect ratio. This isn't automatic - it requires a complete manual redesign of each screen. You'll notice that most iPad buttons aren't twice the size of iPhone ones - they aren't scaled up - they are still exactly the right size for your finger, they're just further apart. (I'm talking about native iPad apps, not upscaled iPhone apps and I'm referring to buttons on modals and tab bars not the keyboard).

Supporting the retina display is simpler because switching image sizes works automatically but that's only possible because the retina display is exactly double the resolution of the 3GS and the screen is the same size. If the screen were bigger or smaller or the pixels weren't an exact multiple of the 3GS then that would have to be done manually as well.

So consider this, if the iPad buttons are the correct size for your finger on a 10" iPad then what happens when you reduce the screen size? If you downscale everything then the buttons will be too small to touch accurately. If you keep them the same size then you break the layout. This can't be done automatically - developers will have to update their apps.

So maybe Apple will just expect developers to update their apps - it wouldn't be the first time. But it would seem a bit strange after launching the iPad only a few months ago to suddenly release an update that breaks half the existing apps. And if Apple knew this was coming you would think there'd be some hint in the developer documentation, like "don't design your apps for a fixed screen size" or "make sure the buttons in your iPad interfaces are a bit bigger than they need to be".

Which is why I think it' more likely a larger touch than a smaller iPad. There would be a few fewer issues with sizing up the interface than scaling it down (and making elements too small to interact with).
post #17 of 208
Quote:
Originally Posted by crawdad62 View Post

Don't see it and yes I know I'm not the center of the universe. Smaller cheaper? iPod Touch comes to mind. Just doesn't seem like there's a whole lot gained or lost whichever is the case by a 7" model that isn't already met by the iPod Touch or the iPad at its current configuration.

If the Touch grows in size, then you've got it. Right now the Touch is fine for gaming and even OK to read on but browsing is torturous.

If you're talking a phone, fine. You don't want to be putting a larger device up to your ear. But the Touch is not a phone, hence not giving it more screen to make browsing much more enjoyable seems like an odd choice. All Apple would have to do is keep the same resolution as the Retina display in a device with let's say a 5" screen and you'd have an upgrade in resolution over the current Touch.

What would be the downside?
post #18 of 208
AppleTV with iOS. That could be pretty amazing, if apple provides APIs to grab/overlay the video/audio stream and access to the tuner controls.
post #19 of 208
Quote:
Originally Posted by Socrates View Post

Of all of these, the 7" iPad seems the least probable.

I'm an iPhone/iPad developer, so I have some experience with what's involved in programming these things. One of the key differences between iPhone and say, Android is that iOS has no real provision for automatically supporting different screen sizes.

Porting from iPhone to iPad means redesigning your interface for a different screen size and aspect ratio. This isn't automatic - it requires a complete manual redesign of each screen. You'll notice that most iPad buttons aren't twice the size of iPhone ones - they aren't scaled up - they are still exactly the right size for your finger, they're just further apart. (I'm talking about native iPad apps, not upscaled iPhone apps and I'm referring to buttons on modals and tab bars not the keyboard).

Supporting the retina display is simpler because switching image sizes works automatically but that's only possible because the retina display is exactly double the resolution of the 3GS and the screen is the same size. If the screen were bigger or smaller or the pixels weren't an exact multiple of the 3GS then that would have to be done manually as well.

So consider this, if the iPad buttons are the correct size for your finger on a 10" iPad then what happens when you reduce the screen size? If you downscale everything then the buttons will be too small to touch accurately. If you keep them the same size then you break the layout. This can't be done automatically - developers will have to update their apps.

So maybe Apple will just expect developers to update their apps - it wouldn't be the first time. But it would seem a bit strange after launching the iPad only a few months ago to suddenly release an update that breaks half the existing apps. And if Apple knew this was coming you would think there'd be some hint in the developer documentation, like "don't design your apps for a fixed screen size" or "make sure the buttons in your iPad interfaces are a bit bigger than they need to be".

Hpw would a Touch with the same resolution as the iPhone Retina display but a larger screen, work out. Would iPhone apps work on a Touch with that set-up without mods?
post #20 of 208
Quote:
Originally Posted by crawdad62 View Post

Don't see it and yes I know I'm not the center of the universe. Smaller cheaper? iPod Touch comes to mind. Just doesn't seem like there's a whole lot gained or lost whichever is the case by a 7" model that isn't already met by the iPod Touch or the iPad at its current configuration.

Okay, I see that you have a problem with myopia as the answer is right there in front of your face.

There is a very large and established marketplace for a device with a screen size of 6-7 inches: the eReader market. Again, the cost reduction is spur many others to purchase.

If you've actually used the iPad and the iPod touch, the latter is not a replacement for the former. In the same way, a swimming pool and hot tub aren't equivalent.

Lastly, I will point out that iMacs, MacBooks and iPods all come in different sizes. No doubt, someone at Apple has noticed this. The fact that Apple debuted one iPad doesn't mean that it's the only valid size, but they needed to start somewhere.
post #21 of 208
I really do hope they have a metal backplate (just *not* polished chrome, thank you), the glass backplate is completely unnecessary since the antenna is integrated on the band. The current design is overly delicate and expensive.
post #22 of 208
Quote:
Originally Posted by cvaldes1831 View Post

Different needs for different people. Your individual usage case isn't the only valid one; you are not the center of the universe. If Apple feels there is a large enough market for a smaller iPad, it is likely they will pursue it.

Plus, the smaller iPad would likely be cheaper. It has been widely reported that price has been a big barrier to iPad adoption.

There's a barrier to iPad adoption?
post #23 of 208
Quote:
Originally Posted by GaspinRasputin View Post

I don't understand the need for a smaller iPad...

If they can deliver it for significantly less than the 10" version then think of how it could be used for specific tasks rather than an all-in-one device. (i.e. an alarm clock, digital photo frame, children's learning device, in-car entertainment/GPS etc)
post #24 of 208
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carmissimo View Post

Thee's a barrier to iPad adoption?

Yes... Apple was unable to get 12 people in Boise, ID to buy one.
Hmmmmmm...
Reply
Hmmmmmm...
Reply
post #25 of 208
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe hs View Post

How exactly would iOS work on apple TV? It's a completely different category of device to iPhone, iPod Touch & iPad.

With a Wiimote clone.

Think about it. It would work.
post #26 of 208
CDMA iPhone? Well that's a new one...
post #27 of 208
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wiggin View Post

Which is why I think it' more likely a larger touch than a smaller iPad. There would be a few fewer issues with sizing up the interface than scaling it down (and making elements too small to interact with).

I don't agree with this sentiment. If Apple were to decrease the size of the iPhone screen from 3.5" to 3", then yes you would run into UI problems. But with a product like the iPad, going from 9.7" down to 7" (or somewhere in between) would not be that problematic, IMO. I feel it would only make the experience better. Keep the same number of pixels so you retain the same resolution- only, it now looks better because you have the same picture on a screen that is (at most) 2.7" smaller. IMO, the iPad in its current size has lots of unused graphical space. That, and I think Apple needs to work on the bezel. If they don't decrease the size of the screen, at least slim up the bezel so that the device isn't as physically wide/tall. I think a lot of the "bulkiness" complaints stem from this.
post #28 of 208
A device operated by remote control is different to both mouse and touchscreen. So it would be a 3rd type of GUI. Unless the magic trackpad is intended for use with the new Apple TV?
post #29 of 208
Quote:
Originally Posted by jbro1999 View Post

lighter, easier to hold and read books.

If it's cheaper its something I would buy.

i'd rather see a lighter weight 9.7" iPad instead of a smaller screen. After experiencing the iPad, I found that it's still too heavy to use for longer than 1 hour of continuous use.

my household just purchased a Nook and I'd have to say it's lighter weight is a huge plus, if you just compare the weight only.
post #30 of 208
Quote:
Originally Posted by Firefly7475 View Post

If they can deliver it for significantly less than the 10" version then think of how it could be used for specific tasks rather than an all-in-one device. (i.e. an alarm clock, digital photo frame, children's learning device, in-car entertainment/GPS etc)

Significantly cheaper than $499, but more expensive than $199?
$299 to $399 is the only viable option and that might start to canibilise iPod Touch sales at $199, $299 & $399
post #31 of 208
Quote:
Originally Posted by GaspinRasputin View Post

I don't understand the need for a smaller iPad...

What's your point? Many people couldn't see the need for an iPad at all. Handbag size media consumption device and you can't see the market for this? Seriously?
post #32 of 208
Quote:
Originally Posted by antkm1 View Post

i'd rather see a lighter weight 9.7" iPad instead of a smaller screen. After experiencing the iPad, I found that it's still too heavy to use for longer than 1 hour of continuous use.

my household just purchased a Nook and I'd have to say it's lighter weight is a huge plus, if you just compare the weight only.

Sorry - that sounds ridiculous. I can use a laptop, on my lap for more than an hour, so why on EARTH can't you cope with a tablet which ways less than a third of a standard laptop? Get down the gym.
post #33 of 208
Quote:
Originally Posted by crawdad62 View Post

Don't see it and yes I know I'm not the center of the universe. Smaller cheaper? iPod Touch comes to mind. Just doesn't seem like there's a whole lot gained or lost whichever is the case by a 7" model that isn't already met by the iPod Touch or the iPad at its current configuration.

I am an exception, I guess. I don't like the current iPad form factor. It is more like the Kindle DX. I would much rather prefer a Kindle sized iPad. It would also be far lighter, and far easier to use while traveling in the subway.

And it will also be a lot cheaper.
post #34 of 208
Quote:
Originally Posted by cvaldes1831 View Post

Plus, the smaller iPad would likely be cheaper. It has been widely reported that price has been a big barrier to iPad adoption.

my hope would be that the next iPad (9.7" model) will start at a lower price. I agree, however i haven't seen data to back it up, that price is a big barrier. For me, weight, price and the inability to comfortably use the device hands-free in my lap are the biggest barriers for purchasing. if they made a 7" iPad that complied with all these, I still don't think i'd purchase one. 9.7" is just about as small as i'd go on screen size, unless i'm only looking to read books. Then, by that matter, i'd just buy the Nook, which we already have one.
post #35 of 208
Quote:
Originally Posted by iReality85 View Post

I don't agree with this sentiment. If Apple were to decrease the size of the iPhone screen from 3.5" to 3", then yes you would run into UI problems. But with a product like the iPad, going from 9.7" down to 7" (or somewhere in between) would not be that problematic, IMO. I feel it would only make the experience better. Keep the same number of pixels so you retain the same resolution- only, it now looks better because you have the same picture on a screen that is (at most) 2.7" smaller. IMO, the iPad in its current size has lots of unused graphical space. That, and I think Apple needs to work on the bezel. If they don't decrease the size of the screen, at least slim up the bezel so that the device isn't as physically wide/tall. I think a lot of the "bulkiness" complaints stem from this.

While I agree with the rest of your post, gotta strongly disagree with the slimming of the Bezel.

As Gruber has pointed out several times, if you slim the bezel, how do you hold the iPad without touching and covering the screen?

The Bezel is as thick as it is for a good reason.
post #36 of 208
Quote:
Originally Posted by nkhm View Post

Sorry - that sounds ridiculous. I can use a laptop, on my lap for more than an hour, so why on EARTH can't you cope with a tablet which ways less than a third of a standard laptop? Get down the gym.

that's because you don't have to hold and type with your lap-top in your hands for an given period of time...your argument is mute.
post #37 of 208
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe hs View Post

Significantly cheaper than $499, but more expensive than $199?
$299 to $399 is the only viable option and that might start to canibilise iPod Touch sales at $199, $299 & $399

Which is why it's unlikely that Apple would keep the Touch with the current size and bring out a 7" iPad. If Apple decides that a smaller touchscreen device is needed than the current iPad, I think they'd sooner bring out one device, probably still call it the Touch, and not have two similarly priced devices filling a similar niche.

Right now the Touch and the iPad perform many of the same functions though the Touch compromises screen real estate for portability. The question is, does Apple have the formula right?

In the case of the iPad, I'd say yes, provided they can get the weight down in future versions. In the case of the Touch, not so much.
post #38 of 208
With gaming so profitable and successful on the iPhone and iPad, I wonder if this new AMD chip will be for gaming? Are we talking Wii level performance or higher? I can't imagine it would be anywhere near 360 or PS3 level, but then again, those systems are 5 years old now. Anyone have any stats on the AMD chip?

As for iOS on the big screen, it makes a lot of sense, but only with properly retooled apps. When paired with a motion sensing Wiimote style controller a lot of games would work pretty well, leaving the touch screen ones off limits unless more significantly reworked. Combine it with a cable killing subscription plan (admittedly, this would be something of an epic achievement if anyone pulled it off), and you'd have a pretty compelling box.
post #39 of 208
Quote:
Originally Posted by antkm1 View Post

that's because you don't have to hold and type with your lap-top in your hands for an given period of time...your argument is mute.

Not sure how you're holding your iPad, mine sits in my lap, i type with two hands with the pad supported in my lap, or on the arm of my sofa. Think you're doing something wrong there - go mute your own argument. Also, who does significant amounts of typing on an iPad - i read for 3 - 4 hours in an evening, check my email, listen to music and keep a check on facebook, no issue. Smaller would fit in my partners handbag, she'd grab one in a second.
post #40 of 208
Funny, just a few hours ago today, I was thinking of posting a poll about who thought Apple was "secretly" compiling iOS for x86. But as someone mentioned, iOS and OS X share so much in common, I'm sure there's R&D going both ways:

iOS on ARM
iOS on x86
OSX on ARM
OSX on x86
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Future Apple Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › CDMA iPhone, AMD-powered Apple TV with iOS, 7-inch iPad rumored