iPad 2...i am confused!

Won't be a smaller model.

Either wait or don't. You obviously don't need one, so it's your decision.

Nobody "needs" anything, really. Especially a piece of tech. Buy the current one, it's great. RAM is handled better than you'd expect. Resale value will be good if you'll want to upgrade to iPad 2. It might be slightly smaller with the same screen resolution.

If you are interested in Facetime then it is obvious you should wait.

Wait! I mean really if the machine doesn't have the features you need why buy it? That should be your number one concern, a device that meets your needs.

The flip side is that the current iPad is a rev one device that has a couple of glaring short comings. No matter what you see posted in the forums the current iPad doesn't have enough RAM. It is also missing some of the hardware seen in iPhone 4.

The current iPad could be a good investment for many people but I just don't see that in your case. Further no one knows exactly what direction Apple will take iPad and how they will compete with the on coming competition. I see two things as being likely. One is an expansion of the iPad family. The second is that the current iPad is likely to see a rather huge overhaul, probably one of the biggest Apple has done recently.

Guys.... this is just spam!

http://forum.tipb.com/ipad-forum/198...ait-not-2.html

And come on 'Skil'! I thought you were the forum police?
You're slipping!

Given the recent removal of links by moderators, I'm of the belief that the link you've posted was once in the OP. However, if it had been, it's incredibly unlikely that I would have missed it and it's incredibly foolish of you to be reposting it.

Thank you, however, for using the correct shortening of my name. Why people want to call me by an adjective, I'll never know.

I don't think the second one will be smaller either. It just needs to be lighter. 1.5lbs isn't that heavy but it feels heavy. I thought that the weight might be mainly due to the battery but it turns out to be the glass display:

Aluminum back 138 grams
Battery 148 grams
LCD 153 grams
Glass (and frame) 193 grams
Speaker: 17 grams
Main board: 21 grams
Everything else: 27 grams

http://www.ifixit.com/Answers/View/1...omponent+weigh

A 7" iPad would look like the following:



It doesn't seem that bad but if you see the 10" relative to your hands, I think it's too small:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DBYqchEsvh0

The Kindle is 0.24kg vs 0.68kg for the iPad. If they laminate the glass to the screen, they can possibly reduce the thickness of it while maintaining the strength. On conservative settings, the iPad can last over 12 hours:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SH3RP2gdtTY

10 hours with wifi browsing.

If they cut the battery by 1/3 to 100g, they could still get 7 hours out of it, which is enough for a day of use.

A lighter backing material would help but the aluminium feels sturdy. They might be able to carve it thinner but they wouldn't want any flexing. Perhaps the liquidmetal deal will make some improvements here.

If they get the glass, battery and backing down to 100g each, that would bring the device down to 500g. Still double the kindle but the kindle is a plastic piece of junk so it doesn't matter if it doesn't match it.

Unfortunately, a 7" model might be the only way they can get the weight down this much but I don't see them making 2 models.

No. The link I posted was to another forum where the OP is just pimping (yet another) iThingy web site.

I am just a little surprised that many of the seasoned pro's on this forum can't spot all this nonsense.

Oh, I can spot it. A 7 inch iPad is idiotic. Why would Apple create a bridge device FOR a bridge device? They're a vertical company, not a horizontal one. A 7-inch iPad wouldn't do/be anything an iPod touch or iPad couldn't/wouldn't.

Do you really think Apple will get by with just one iPad when they market several different types of laptops? This idea tbat there will ever only be one size of iPad boggles the mind. The current form factor will continue to get rev'ed but it is also easy to see where Apple could do another device. If for nothing else to address the portability issue.

You are making an assumption here. Frankly a seven inch iPad would do better modeled after a Touch. Mainly because iPads aspect ratio is all wrong for a smaller device.

I can get GPS systems with screens from around 2" to 7" all designed to be handheld. They all have their uses. This idea that a 7" iPad would be to small is silly considering Touch already exists. An intermediate device simply serves a different need.

It is notable that Kindle comes in multiple sizes and nobody bats an eye.

As to that battery life 12 hours isn't good enough, it needs to survive at least that long with heavy usage or a good 8 hours of video playback. The biggest factor here is the screen and the only improvement there is better LED back lighting.

Nope not even close. IPad needs better run times not worst. The good thing here is that batteries are improving rather quickly so you still might get your weight reduction.

Maybe an improved metal back would work. On the otherhand there are some engineered plastics out there that are simply amazing. Expensive though. In any event the case is Aluminum for marketing reasons.

The Kindle is hardly junk. It might not be my cup of tea but it certainly isn't junk. Besides why the obsession with wieght? Could it be lighter, sure but its current wieght isn't a problem.

Actually I could see multiple models. But again those models would not exist to cut down wieght, rather they would exist to offer up additional physical sizes to serve those users that don't want the size of the iPad. IPads physical size makes it impossible to use in some situations.

This type of thinking seems to be very common with many Apple users, especially users of the Touch devices. Frankly there is no rational explanation that I can grasp for this attitude. Every one acknowledges that Apple builds multiple laptop models and is likely to introduce even more models but for some reason only one size of iPad is acceptable. Why is that?

Size is one good reason to produce a smaller iPad as the current one is to big for some uses. Another reason would be to have a device optimized for Video play back, something that is really screwed up on iPad. By the way this means a completely different aspect ratio.

The main problem with Touch is that it is modeled after iPhone in size so it really offers nothing in the way of additional screen capability. In a nut shell even a little more screen area would do a lot for portable apps. If you could double screen area and keep a device pocketable is that not something worthy of consideration? Certainly as you move to seven inches in size pocketability goes out the window but portability with respect to iPad does not.

I just think it is silly to dismiss alternative sizes for any device. It would be like going to the truck dealer and having only one size of van to choose from. If one van size doesn't suit everybody why should one iPad size? Obviously having multiple overlaping laptops hasn't hurt Apple and here we aren't even talking about an overlaping size. So convince me otherwise.



Dave

Because the different laptop sizes cater to different audiences. Can you give me one legitimate use for a 7" iPad that isn't already fulfilled by the 10" and 3.5" form factors?


Sure, putting in your pocket. That's what the iPhone/iPod touch was designed to do.


So you want a 2.39:1 device? Good luck.


What's so unportable about an iPad?


Sure. I want a 27" laptop, a 13" iMac, a 6" iPhone, and a 15" iPad.


Except they don't have anything of that sort.

It has a big enough screen to run iPad apps better than an iPhone but could be over 30% lighter. That's the only thing. It makes it easier to carry around as you walk.

Thing is, they might not be able to make a retina display at 10" and you can be fairly certain they'd want to use that pixel density. At 10", the resolution would be in the region of the 27" iMac.

I personally prefer the larger screens but if they test it and find that 7" now works best then that's what they'll build. You can only really make an assessment of a form factor when you hold it. While I was ok with the iPad size and would even like it bigger, I felt it was too heavy.

The icons are also spaced out too far so on the 7" they'd leave them the same size and close the gaps. Word processing might seem a bit cramped but pictures and movies shouldn't be much different. All you really have to do is move slightly closer to the device. A 7" display held at 17" will look the same as a 10" device held at 24" away. If it's a lot lighter, this will be much easier to do comfortably.

7" widescreen in the real world looks like this:



http://news.cnet.com/8301-31021_3-20017625-260.html

The iPad would be slightly larger due to the aspect ratio.

Purchase what you really need. Not what you don't need. To me the 7inch screen is to small.My opinion.

I've held something in a 7" form factor. It's absolutely useless. Easier to carry around? I felt foolish carrying it around. It's small enough that the subconscious reaction is to try to put it in your pocket, but you can't because no one has pockets that large. At least the iPad feels like a notebook (Paper one. You know, those old things before computers.) and can be comfortably carried under the arm.


Except no one really needs an iPad...

1. Replacement for a Day Timer or similar organizer.
2. EBook reader. This is actually huge and a growing market.
3. A portable computing device.
4. An iPad / computer that functions as an in car navigation system.
5. A computer for the professional. Professionals that wear labcoats if you are really worried about where the will put the seven inch iPad.

Yep something your cell phone is designed to do. However your cell phone has one problem, it is compromised by its small screen. A sub seven inch iPad would offer a considerable increase in screen real estate yet remain portable.

Now you are just being difficult. If you knew anything about hollywood you would realize that a number of different ratios have been used over the years. TV in the US at keast has fewer to choose from. The fact remains that a wider screen results in more of the screen being used to deliver whatever content is being shown.

In fact I see iPad, with its current screen ratio, as a poor choice if your intent is to use it to watch movies extensively. It is really hard to debate this as the narrow aspect ratio can have a significant impact on the content.

Never said it was unportable. Rather it isn't as portable as the seven inch class devices. Further the aspect ratio is wrong if you intent or desire was for a video iPad and even further as devices get smaller the wider aspect ratios make even more sense because of usability factors.

You must have money to burn. Frankly I'm still on my 3G iPhone simply because there are better uses for my money than buying Apple hardware every year. So I consider carefully ever purchase I make from Apple.

In the case of iPad it has been one of the harder devices to ignore. But I continue trying to resist because I'm expecting that the next rev will be major in an attempt to fully realize the vision people at Apple have had when developing iPad in the first place. In part I'm expecting that sub 7" device to partner up with the 10" device. Why because I think there is a significant market for such a device and I think Apple knows it.

Well lets see we have the Mac Book, Mac Book Pro and the AIR that most certainly overlap each other. Of course you will find some wiggle room and point out the difference, possibly the minor differences in screen size. The fact remains they are all small laptops with larger models further up the product family ladder.

In any event if Apple can get buy with three small laptops, a midrange and a large laptop they can easily handle multiple iPad sizes. Maybe even a bigger iPad to go along with the 7" class device.

It is a no brainer as they say. The thing is just because you can't personally see the value in a smaller iPad, there are many that can.

Probably a cultural name change, but I don't know what this is.


Fulfilled by both the 3.5" and 9.6" form factors.


Fulfilled by the 3.5" form factor. You want a 7" thing on your dash blocking the view, be my guest.





Seven inch device can't be comfortably carried on its own. I think I mentioned that.


No, I'm being optimal.


If you didn't make assumptions about my knowledge, you wouldn't look like a fool.


No, not really. Especially with a 2.39:1 screen. 16:9 can fit in 4:3 fairly easily, but when you're watching lower ratios on a higher ratio screen, they get small. You're always going to have the black bars. Doesn't matter if your device is 4:3, 16:10, 16:9, or 2.39:1.


See? You're just whining about black bars now. For you to be happy with the device, it would have to be 2.39:1, but just now you made fun of me for suggesting so.


I was being facetious. The comment to which I was replying was equally so.


The screen sizes are identical. That's meaningless. The devices are not.

Someone says, "I want something low-end." They buy the MacBook. Period.
Someone says, "I want something a little nicer." They buy the 13" MacBook Pro or a 15".
Someone says, "I want something ultraportable." They buy the MacBook Air REGARDLESS of if they would otherwise have even a 17" laptop or even a desktop. It doesn't cater to anywhere near the same audience as the rest of their line.


Try carrying just the device. See how annoying it becomes.