Originally Posted by SSquirrel
You can look at the current iPad, see what proportion of the width and height is border, assume something similar and figure out what the WxH would be in a 4:3 ratio, at least I think that is the ratio for the iPad screen. That would be 7x5.6x4.2.
Here are the figures for the current iPad.
1.8"x1.65" Extra size beyond screen
Comparing the screen sizes, we see:
9.7" 438.08 in^3
7" 164.64 in^3
2.66x the size of the 7"
Divide the extra size from above by 2.66 and you get reductions of:
1.8-.68 and 1.65-.62 added onto the 7x5.6x4.2 dimensions above gives you a total 7" iPad size of 6.62x5.23 instead of 9.56*7.47. This is significantly smaller and, as we can see, predictable if they follow similar bezel margins.
: "Overall size" and "proportional scaling" are implied in my prior post.
Even before the iPad came out, Apple to my knowledge has emphasized that the Apps must not be too confined by the size of the early IPhones. As revealed by Steve Jobs himself, it was because the iPhone is a serendipiituous invention while the iPad was being perfected.
There was therefore already an Apple mindset of smaller and larger family of related mobile devices. There must be a game plan for proportional scaling of these similar devices, but only those who are so full of themselves would be so sure that the smaller device would be exactly be a "6.7-inch iPad". I am sure that they considered different potential functions for a smaller or even larger IPads, and played with the dimensions.
However, Apple based from their earlier actions did not anticipate how significant third party Apps have defined the success of the iPhone.
What even Apple/Steve Jobs may not have fully appreciated is the impact of the larger real estate in the iPad, as it impacted the Apps. Thus, even if the Apps that worked and engrossing on the iPhone/iPod Touch, might appeal boring or out of place in the iPad.
To drive this point, you do not make your furniture larger to suit a larger living room. You get more furniture or rearrange the way the contents interact. The point here is that proportional scaling would be nice but need not become the determining factor given a different size.
If developers can sell a different modified version of their previous iPhone Apps, and consumers will buy them, who would care about exact compatibilities in proportion? Same concept game, different product evolution, more sales.
To repeat myself, everyone was predicting the iPad to be 10", but Apple came up with the magic 9.7". I am not sure if they slightly changed the screen size of the iPhone 4 or it was just the overall size that can be changed because of the more sharp rectuagalar shape over the "cuevy" earlier versions.
Such change to adjust to the size the real estate may suit the IPad but may not scale properly in the smaller iPhone/iPod Touch.
The other reality is that the "7-inch iPad" is still a figment of our imagination, just like the 10" iPad materilized as "9.7"-inch iPad. As such, who can really be so certain that the smaller iPad would exactly be "7-inch iPad"?
The other point is that the dimensions can even vary slightly. At these sizes, the difference from proportional scale may not be as noticeable. The choice of colors can have an impact on that. The impaxt of our perception depending on how it is presented.
Coming from research, and dealing images for publishing, or presentation by audio-visual or poster. We aim for proportiately scaled figures, but unless the difference is very glaring, no one would be so anal to take actual measurements.
I am sure Apple would try to make the products as close to the correct proportial scale for the screen, and change the dimensions accordingly.
But, who is to compel that prior precedent will dictate future design? I do not think the Classic Mac dimensional ratios resemble any of the existing Macs. Even the earlier versions of the MacBook is different from the more recent versions. It adjusted to the needs of the time based on converging and new technologies.