Apple again rumored to launch 7" iPad in 2012 - Page 2

So where does the 7" iPad fall into these idiots' scheme of also having a 5" iPhone?

Because if you have that, then they're "too close together" instead of being "too far apart".

I agree with both of you completely. I enjoy my iPad, but I actually prefer the size of the kindle to type on much better. Whereas on the iPad, it's easiest for me to type landscape and hunt and peck type, it's insanely easy for me to type on portrait on my iPhone. The 7" allows me to type just like that and hold it in my hands easier (I have big hands and can type on a fire about as easy as my iPhone and way easier than my iPad). That's not a knock on the iPad itself, just the size.

I'd buy one tomorrow. A $299 price point for the low end (8 or 16gb) would make me do cartwheels.

You say that now, and yes- rumors are rumors. But this isn't unbelievable. 7" tablets are still a new thing, and it's very common for apple to let others do it a while and then make a better one.

I hope it would be closer to 7" than 8".



Why have a 15" MacBook pro? There is a 13" and 17" already. Seems too close together (sarcasm).

A 5" iPhone is a pretty blatant exaggeration, but the same size iphone as we have now could take it to 3.8" or maybe 4". That'd be pretty significant, and I'd love it as long as the phone itself didn't get bigger.

Ummm... it is too small. Every (remotely popular) 7" tablet on the market uses a widescreen LCD and, in that aspect ratio, 7" is way too narrow in portrait orientation and comically awkward in landscape. (Opera Mobile's text wrapping makes my Nook Color immensely more useable in portrait)

All the rumors suggest that any smaller iPad Apple produces will be closer to 8 inches than 7, and it'll certainly be a 4:3 aspect ratio. Remember how a 36" TV was freakin' huge before everyone had plasma and LCD televisions? Now, in widescreen, 36" is about the minimum size you'd want to buy for a small room. People are underestimating the influence that this effect combined with an extra .75 to 1.25" of diagonal real estate will have on users' perception of the size. A near-8" iPad will look appreciably larger than the Fire and other current 7" Android tablets.

I've never seen that at all. All the rumors say 7".


Or you could just look at a 9.5" iPad, which looks appreciably larger than the Fire and other current 7" Android tablets.

8" makes even LESS sense than 7".

The old-fashioned name is the Bozo Bin. Bozos make the sound Plonk when they hit the bottom.

7" widescreen tablets are still too small. This would have the same ratio as the iPad has and it is just shy of 8". So they would most likely bill it as an 8" tablet and they don't dispute Steve's statement about 7" tablets

I don't know that things would be so much worse to read on a nearly 8" screen vs the 9.7" they have now. I'm sure someone will do the math for us and tell us what % of screen space it has vs the current. I'm guessing somewhere in the 60-70% range

Note, this doesn't mean I think they're doing it, just saying

It is the perfect size right now. That is why Apple chose that size. Apple will never stray from perfection.

No new screen sizes for any Apple product ever!

ALL... Really?

"Asian supply chain sources are now claiming Apple will release a 7.85-inch iPad by the fourth quarter of 2012 to face off against competition from smaller tablets such as Amazon's Kindle Fire."


FACT: 7.85 inches is much closer to 8 inches than 7.

I would love a 15 inch tablet.

Just last night, I was reading some comix on my laptop. The pages looked much better with one page onscreen, sideways. I was tempted to put the laptop on its side.

A 15 inch tablet would be great! If i had a retina screen, I might even consider it, despite it running only iOS.

I don't know if I buy Apple putting out a Kindle Killer... which is what a 7-incher would be. The iPad is the perfect size (to the commenter who cited Apple's laptop lineup -- that's completely different, the screen is just there to display information; with the iPad, you're interacting with the screen, so yes, three is an ideal size), and if anyone says a 7-inch tablet is the right size, they're either lying (fandroid), crazy (fandroid), or they've never actually used an iPad (fandroid).

That said, I don't think a 7-inch tablet is "unusable" as Steve's comments suggested (sandpaper). It's plausible that Apple would want to mine the lower end of the market (a la $0 iPhone 3GS), and crush the Kindle Fire (make no mistake -- a $2-300 iPad would crush the Fire)... but it still doesn't seem likely.

I see the two spaces as independent markets... and the 7-inch market is a loss-leader. Apple's not in that game.

7" is also perfect for dual screen tablet. If Apple can build such a device (remember Courier?) with retina display and a stylus (iPen? - yes, I know how SJ felt about it) it would be a killer product.

Well, you'll have to get it from someone other than Apple.

I screen capped this reply for later.

I would LOVE a 15" iPad that used a stylus for photoshop or served as an interaction surface for my desktop. The 10" iPad just barely has room for ten fingers worth of multi-touch input.

I think something about 30" would be awesome mated to two additional 30" upright or wall mounted displays. Then the top edge of the iPad could be used to pull down windows from the vertical displays which wouldn't need to be touch-enabled.

Add 20" to that display and I would buy it. WYSIWYG from screen to 300 dpi print out.

I don't think you'll be here in ten to the googol years when this actually does happen, you know.

Maybe not, but I think it will take far less than 10 years for battery to be good enough for 7" dual screen.

Most have said 7.x" and everyone promptly ignores the x. A smaller number have said 8.x.



8" in 4:3 brings the screen height in portrait orientation up to just a bit larger than the likes of the 7" Tab and the Fire. More importantly, it makes for a much-needed increase in portrait width and resolution. (The latter as compared to 1024x600 tablets)

I got my Nook Color long after getting an iPad because I wanted the 7" form factor to work. It's comfortable to hold, easy to take with you, and all-around "cozy". Unfortunately, it falls short on usability because of the goofy fixation on wide screens that everyone but Apple seems to have. Maybe the newer models with high-DPI screens will remedy that a bit but, right now, with fixed-width web pages and lower DPI, the nearly 30% increase in horizontal resolution of 4:3 is looking very attractive.

I would use my iPad a lot more if it were a bit smaller. A 7" iPad would be perfect. I ended up buying a cheap 7" Android tablet just for the improved portability and better format as an eReader. Some people find sub-compacts suit their needs best, others really need an SUV. For me, a 7" tablet is a significant improvement in usability over a 10" one.

I'm not buying the excuses as to why Apple couldn't utilize a smaller screen. They design the hardware and write the software, they can do anything they want with it, including things you've never thought of.

Keep in mind that which device consumers find most useful or desirable, is not the only criterion apple is evaluating.

One of the most valuable things that iOS has going for it is a unified platform. Applications look and behave identically between devices because the screens are the same size and shape. Though the iPad broke with this convention, resulting in two different screen sizes and aspect ratios. Even the retina display was handled in such a manner that apps still look good on a new or old device. With an even multiple of pixels, scaling results in blocky but otherwise correctly rendered interfaces.

So the real question is, is it worth splintering the platform more in order to provide another screen size? This is an honest question about a fairly obviously real tradeoff. Though I don't think the answer is as simple or clear as some would think.

An iPad w/a 7.85" screen in a 4:3 format would have these dimensions:
7.85 Diagonal
6.28 Wide
4.71 High

29.5788 sq inches area

The kindle fire has a screen size with the following dimensions:

7 D
6.10 W
3.43 H

20.923 sq inches area

The width won't increase much (0.18"), but you are gaining over an inch in height (yes this is all in my head in landscape mode) (1.28" to be precise) and 0.85" on the diagonal which lets things be much more spread out. Apple clearly experimented w/smaller screens and decided that the 7" format was a bit too cramped for what they wanted to be doing on an iPad. 7.85 adds nearly an inch to diagonal, giving us a total area increase of 41% over the 7" tablet. Just go using 4:3 instead of 16:9 and adding 0.85" to the diagonal. That is a significant increase. The difference in surface are for teh screen of the 7" Fire compared w/the 9.7" iPad is huge.


EDIT: Just for fun, here is the iPad dimensions based on screen size

9.7 D
4.76 H
8.45 W

40.22 sq inches area


Note the iPad screen is just shy of double the area of the Kindle Fire. It's just over 1/3 larger than the proposed 7.85" screen.

For those interesting in the math to figure dimensions w/only a diagonal measurement and aspect ratio, here you go:
(stolen from: http://forum.onlineconversion.com/showthread.php?t=7230)

For a 4:3 tv, the height:width:diagonal are in the ratio 3:4:5. So the height is 3/5 x the diagonal, and width 4/5
(or 60% and 80%).

For a 16:9 tv, the ratio is 9:16:sqrt(337). Height is 9*diag/sqrt(337), width is 16*diag/sqrt(337), or about 49% and 87% of diagonal.

sqrt of 337 = 18.357559750685819298491719518707



I don't think they would have to. They would keep the 1024x768 resolution of the iPad and the same 4:3 aspect ratio it has and then iPad apps would be the same, just a bit smaller. iPhone apps would still get bigger like they do, just not AS big

Take a gander at the Samsung Galaxy Tab 8.9. It is the perfect size.

A 7" iPad would be perfect for gaming. The iPhone is too small and the iPad is too clunky and heavy for gaming. Instead of holding the iPad with both hands and using your thumbs, you have to put the iPad on a flat surface and use your index fingers, which just doesn't work for certain games.

A 7" iPod Touch/iPad would be great. And a 7" e-ink reader to complement the iPad. One of the reasons Apple was so successful with iTunes/iPod was that they covered every segment of the portable music player market. Apple needs to do the same with the tablet market. Cover the low end with a 5-7" iPod Touch/iPad. I'm tired of watching my 4 year old drop my iPad. Double down on iBooks with a dedicated e-ink reader. This would really help to counter Amazon's growing threat to the iTunes ecosystem.

Really

The whole point of iCloud is sync and that gives Apple the leverage to come out with different form factors for iOS and make that device easy to add to ones existing ecosystem.

I'd seriously consider a 7.85" iPad mini.

I think the lineup could be.

$199 iPod Touch 3.5" 16GB w/ Facetime and BT 4.0

$299 iPad Mini 7.85 16GB w/ FaceTime and BT 4.0

$499 and up iPad 3 HiRez

DO you have really small hands or something? I never have to do that. Play the Tron game that was released when teh 2nd Tron movie came out. You control the tanks w/your thumbs on either side of the screen and it works great w/o needing to set the iPad down. Just an example



My youngest is 3 1/2 and I don't recall a time she has dropped it b/c we've always impressed upon her how it is expensive and if she damages it she doesn't get to use it anymore Plus it's a first gen, so we have the Apple case for it and that pads it very well if it does drop.


Bleh, I don't think Apple wants to get in the business of a single purpose device like that when their current devices all do a perfectly fine job for reading plus so much more.


I think we will see a $400 iPad 2 16GB left in the mix and I think the iPod Touch and iPad Mini would both stick to 8GB. Otherwise yeah, and of course the iPad 3 will get BT 4 as well. Maybe wedge it into the iPad 2 if it doesn't have it yet.

Wow you must have huge pockets lol. Your sticking a 7" kindle fire in your back pocket?

A five or six inch diagonal size would be best for me. Seven inches at the outside would still work. Seven and eighty-five hundredths inches though not much bigger in length, is really much bigger in area. That would be bigger than ideal.

I wanted a bigger iPod Touch this year and didn't get one. I might have gone for one had there been a good internal upgrade, but all they offered was "white".

Apple made Garage Band work on the iPod Touch and that is one of the things I had desired. I hope the reports are wrong about the size. I hope the screen size is between five and seven inches and no larger. If the new model is the bigger size it doesn't seem worth the compromise. I might as well get an iPad.

A Nook Color with a 7" display fits comfortably if not solidly in the back pocket of a standard pair of slim-fit Levi's, 34 waist.

6-7" would be awesome. My two wishes are that type of giant touch (or whatever it'd be called) and a nano that has Bluetooth capabilities so I can wear it as a watch and it send me my phones notifications so I don't have to pull it out of my pocket.

And for those thinking it'll cannibalize other products- just me- so small sample size- but I have a iPad and my daughter has a touch (only because I got it for $50- she's 2 so it's just for music in a dock). I would keep my iPad and still get this. I havent bought myself a touch (zero point when I have an iPhone). So here's a guy that would buy it and not in lieu of another product.

Ditto

The 7" screen is for an infotainment system Apple is working on with the Volkswagen group. It will most likely debut in the 2013 Audi A3. Siri voice control, Apple's new maps. etc etc etc

Reference or link?

There's an old story from 4 years ago about Audi and Apple partnering on a combo nav/audio/entertainment unit. At the time it was supposedly for the Volkswagen group within the company.
http://news.cnet.com/8301-10784_3-9768521-7.html

The rumor's been resurrected a few times. Perhaps the OP thinks he knows something concrete about it now.

Thanks for the link Gator! Yeah... So if you watch every little tiny detail like I do, every time Apple mentions how many cars have iPod integration, they ALWAYS showed an Audi (even though Steve had a new Benz every several months). Audi has popped up in Apple commercials as well. They were also one of the FIRST apps in the app store. "The A4 Driving Experience" or something like that. Siri will decimate Microsoft Sync and Apple's gonna use VW as their first partner to do it. Probably Audi as it's a luxury brand...

I remember the touchscreen for the iPod nano popping up and everyone being like "what the frig? iPhone nano???" Same thing goin on here. This isn't and iPad it's infotainment.

They'll give it a 6" screen, which matches the 3 x 5 card format; install proper Handwriting recognition; and call it the "NewTouch.

Cheers

I so much LOVE the American language! Definitely taking Tony Thorne's Dictionary of Contemporary Slang (Amazon) with me this skiing holiday. Thanks for this 1 Sol!

Wouldn't that be same thing just about?

"DigiTimes claimed ..."

That should make its untruth obvious before you even start. Digitimes makes their money from inventing rumors. Of course AI makes it from repeating them, so we get even silly ones from Digitimes.

Seems like total BS to me.

The color nooks is:
210 x 130 x 12mm

Standard CD Jewel case is(smaller in every dimension):
141 x 124 x 10mm

I don't think Pocket size increases that much with waist size.

I wear size 32". I don't have a Color nook , but I do have standard CD case jewel case (thicker old style).

I tried every pair of jeans I own and CD Jewel case is not even close to fitting in back pocket of any of them, including two different pairs of Levis.

For wide load types it may fit partially into a back pocket of some jean, but it would seem to be fairly idiotic to carry it that way even if you could jam half of it into a back pocket.