AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › Apple again rumored to launch 7" iPad in 2012
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple again rumored to launch 7" iPad in 2012 - Page 3

post #81 of 90
12/18/11 at 9:59am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowdog65 View Post

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.

Since I have both the jeans and the Nook Color, I can confirm exactly what I claimed.

EDIT: And just for giggles I confirmed again in a pair of 505 straight-fits. It fits width wise just fine, tho the pocket isn't nearly deep enough for me to trust walking around with it for long.

EDIT2: the original Levi Slim-fits I mentioned were a 36, and not a 34 waist. My bad. The 505 Straights are a 34

melior diabolus quem scies

"No theatrics and no more personal attacks, just stick to the logic and tell me why I don't have any argument ~ Jragosta/2012

Reply

melior diabolus quem scies

"No theatrics and no more personal attacks, just stick to the logic and tell me why I don't have any argument ~ Jragosta/2012

Reply
post #82 of 90
12/18/11 at 10:28am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

EDIT2: the original Levi Slim-fits I mentioned were a 36, and not a 34 waist. My bad. The 505 Straights are a 34


So basically this trick with 32" waist or under is impossible. 34" Maybe you can jam it partially in the pocket, but not secure and 36"+ secure?

Still a pointless exercise IMO.
Reply
Reply
post #83 of 90
12/18/11 at 10:30am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowdog65 View Post

So basically this trick with 32" waist or under is impossible. 34" Maybe you can jam it partially in the pocket, but not secure and 36"+ secure?

Still a pointless exercise IMO.

Guess it's pointless to try it in your jeans., and pointless to call BS.

And no, they aren't "jammed " into the 34's, sliding all the way to the bottom of the straight section. Even then that leaves nearly half the Nook above the pocket, which is why I wouldn't walk far that way.

melior diabolus quem scies

"No theatrics and no more personal attacks, just stick to the logic and tell me why I don't have any argument ~ Jragosta/2012

Reply

melior diabolus quem scies

"No theatrics and no more personal attacks, just stick to the logic and tell me why I don't have any argument ~ Jragosta/2012

Reply
post #84 of 90
12/18/11 at 12:37pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowdog65 View Post

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.

CD Jewel case fits easily in the back pocket of any of my 34" jeans.

My 7" Android tablet? I can jam it in, but it's not easy. Maybe just a little smaller than 7" would be a better format.
Reply
Reply
post #85 of 90
12/18/11 at 2:00pm
  • hmm
  • Keylogger
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilBoogie View Post

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!

They underpriced that book. It should be new from $13.37
Reply
Reply
post #86 of 90
12/18/11 at 3:21pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by bsenka View Post

My 7" Android tablet? I can jam it in, but it's not easy. Maybe just a little smaller than 7" would be a better format.

Yeah, like 4" or 5", with voice and 3g and we call it a smart phone.

Still the 7.85" rumor is one of the worse ones yet from digitimes, 7.85 might be smaller than a regular ipad, but it won't fit in any pockets but winter parkas, it won't even be that comfortable to hold in one hand. This is real loser size.

If Apple goes to a device between the Touch and the iPad, I think they would lean more toward the smaller end, not the larger, so sub 6", not greater than 7".

Like someone else mentioned, simply a bigger Touch would likely better fit the bill. ~5" version with 3:2 ratio and even the same resolution as the touch would be a great pocket-able that would actually fit in anyone's pocket. Also it wouldn't break any Apple design rules as it would simple be bigger version of what already exists.
Reply
Reply
post #87 of 90
1/28/12 at 8:47pm
I can't see Apple going to a 7" iPad, and frankly I don't care - what I do want to see is an iPad under 400 grams with a high screen res - minimum 1280x800. The current 613g is way too heavy to hold for any length of time for reading in bed or whatever, and while the iPhone is light enough for reading - the screen and resolution are too small.
Reply
Reply
post #88 of 90
1/28/12 at 8:50pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by macgirl54 View Post

...with a high screen res - minimum 1280x800.

I read comments like that and don't think people are thinking before posting. You're saying Apple needs to move from a 4:3 to a 16:10 aspect ratio yet you didn't specifically state it yet nothing else can be inferred unless you are suggesting that Apple use odd-shaped pixels.

"Blank! BLANK! You're not looking at the big picture!"

Reply

"Blank! BLANK! You're not looking at the big picture!"

Reply
post #89 of 90
1/28/12 at 8:58pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by macgirl54 View Post

…minimum 1280x800.

You mean 2048x1536.

Quote:
The current 613g is way too heavy to hold…

Bulk up. I have absolutely no trouble holding my first gen, even. it's just a pound and a half and the 2 is even lighter. And I'm seriously absolutely pathetic when it comes to that sort of thing.
PhilBoogie
That's Google alright. For a stupid company they sure do dumb things.
Reply
PhilBoogie
That's Google alright. For a stupid company they sure do dumb things.
Reply
post #90 of 90
1/29/12 at 12:23pm
Oh man I hope not I just bought a Samsung Galaxy 7,7" for my small tablet needs. If I would have known Apple would release a 7" I would have waited. The 7 inch form factor is great, I first started out with a 7" Nook Color rooted with Miui and I loved it. Then I recently got a 5.3" Samsung Galaxy Note to replace my Apple iphone 4 with a cracked screen. I think these mini tablets are very usefull while I'm on the go and Apple is missing out on this sector. Oh well anyone in the market for a 7,7" tablet made by Samsung, you can even make phone calls on it.
I've seen things you little people wouldn't believe. Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion bright as magnesium. I rode on the back decks of a blinker and watched c-beams glitter in the...
Reply
I've seen things you little people wouldn't believe. Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion bright as magnesium. I rode on the back decks of a blinker and watched c-beams glitter in the...
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPad
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › Apple again rumored to launch 7" iPad in 2012