Apple viewed as unlikely to launch 7-inch iPad in 2012 - Page 2

Without going all thru this again (for the third time), a Nook Color fits in the back pocket of a pair of 34" waist Levi Jeans fine, some pairs more snugly than others even in the same brand and style. I imagine 36" waist and up have room to spare.

The purse comment is very appropriate as women reportedly prefer the smaller 7" devices over the larger iPad's.

Steve Jobs had a long history of making statements only to release a product not long thereafter that was in direct contradiction to said statement. The fact that this guy is using that quote as one reason Apple won't release a 7" tablet in 2012 proves he is an idiot.

From what I have seen of Android 7" tablets (different aspect ratio), they are at the edge of the size that I could comfortably carry around all the time. If a 7" iPad existed, I would be tempted to dump my iPhone for a basic, non-smart phone, and just carry a 7" 3G iPad where ever I go.

In other words, I think a 6"-7" iPad is just as much of a threat to iPhone sales as it is iPad sales. Of course, the smart money says, if you have to loose sales of one product, it would be better to loose them to another one of your products rather than a competitor's product.

Personally, I have no idea if a 7" iPad will ship in 2012. I hope it does but I am not holding my breath.

-kpluck

It will fit in a back pocket... but how much of it sticks out? And you have to take it out of your pocket to sit down, right?

A smart phone disappears in a pocket no problem. I'd imagine people carry a smart phone 100% of the time. My question is... how often would you carry a 7" tablet?

So often that you need hands-free carrying of a 7" tablet and a 4" phone?

The positive of a 7" tablet is the ability to carry it in a back pocket... while the negative is that it has half the screen real estate of 10" tablets.

And you've already got a small screen on a phone.

A nook color is 5.0" x 8.1".

An iPad mini with a proportionally sized bezel would be around 6" x 8"... I think that extra inch of width would bump up the minimum waist size considerably.

Sorry, I have a 34" waist, and there is no way in hell that a Fire would fit in my back pocket.

As far as purses go, like I said, an iPad can easily fit in a Birkin or a Valentino 360.

I don't know if a Fire would fit either and I've not even discussed one. I can categorically state as a FACT that the Nook color will fit the back-pocket of 34" waist Levi's. 36" and up shouldn't even be questionable, and we're not talking cargo pants.

It's a dumb thing to argue about if you've never tried it.

Jobs' point was that shrinking a tablet OS down to 7" size was unworkable practically (the "sandpaper fingers" issue). the home screen setup and button sizes can be adjusted to avoid cramming, but there is no way to present web pages and their embedded links at a readable size without constant zooming and fiddling, like you have to do with a smaller smartphone. all studies show web browsing is the #1 activity on tablets. a 10" screen works really good for readability, and the iPad's 4:3 screen is also noticeably better for webpage display than Android's 16:10 screen. i'd say the iPad is designed to optimize web browsing, and that was the fundamentally right choice.

but this doesn't rule out an Apple mid-sized tablet. instead of a shrunken iPad, it would be an enlarged iPod touch. the touch is ALREADY Apple's "mini-tablet." always was, the name was just a marketing tactic. altho it is true that it is designed to optimize media, games, and social activity, not browsing. (btw, its 3:2 screen aspect is almost the same as Android's 16:10 screen, which was optimized for media.)

a larger iPod touch in the 5"-6" range would be much more portable than 7" tablets - still pocket-sized - and still run iPhone apps. (the screen resolution pixel count would need to be double the current one). it could be priced at just $100 more than the current touch - so starting at $299. it would be a killer product, and so that's my prediction for 2012.

the 7" tablets are optimal for only one popular use: e-reading, thanks to being lightweight and about the same size as a paperback book. that's the Kindle/Nook niche market. all the other brands' 7 inchers are gonna flop.

A 7" iPad would really negate the need for an iPhone altogether for a lot of buyers. A plain ol' dumbphone would work great, with the bonus that there are some that are better phones than most smartphones.

Apple releases a 7 inch iPad in 2012.

Seconds after introduction there are 237 comments on AI saying, "I told you so!".

Should be interesting...

I really think the driving reason behind the kindle fire is the price point, not the form factor. You don't have tons of people not buying the iPad because it's too big.

If apple is able to compete on price, that is the only answer they would need to the fire

As if one was needed at all

That doesn't really help either.

Even if a 7" tablet will fit in a back pocket.... it's still rather clunky to carry with you all the time. Especially if you must carry an additional cell phone.

Pocket-sized smart phones already handle phone calls and internet/apps/games... in one device.

A flip-phone and a 7" tablet is silly... a 4" smart phone and a 7" tablet is ridiculous considering the overlap of features. Why not split the difference and get a 5.3" phone?

My point is... the pocketability of 7" tablets can't be a highly regarded feature. I don't think too many people are buying 7" tablets because they must carry them in their pocket at all times.

And not many people want to carry two devices... especially if one of them is a 7" tablet.

Not true according to various studies. I've linked one here:

http://www.gottabemobile.com/2011/08...re-from-venus/

Women generally prefer the smaller forms, and don't look at them as a jack-of-all-trades. They like to read their books and magazines, do some light web-browsing, on-line shopping, check their email. Those are all activities that a 7-8" display with a lighter weight will handle well. Easier and lighter to carry around too. Throwing another $300 or more at it on an iPad won't really make those activities that much better IMHO. Men look at it differently than women.

Bingo! Give that man the prize!

I can technically carry an iPad down the front of my pants but that doesn't intrinsically make it something I want to do.

No, an 8" iPad would not fit in your back pocket.
No, people will not be replacing their cellphones with tablets.

I'm not arguing that an 8" tablet would fit a back pocket. I haven't even mentioned one. Personally I don't see any advantage at all to an 8" tablet. It's not really any more portable than the current iPad and I can't think of any particualr reason to choose that size as an add-on to the current line. On the other hand a 6-7" iPad has market potential.

I do think that some people will replace their smartphones with a small tablet if/when the form gets improved. A 3.5" web-enabled device really isn't a joy to use. After a couple of years a portable tablet looks pretty attractive if you just gotta be connected while on the go, at least in my opinion. Apple will eventually put something out to cover that mid-size portability.

When you take your iPad along with you, do you use your phone for anything other than texts or phone calls? I would imagine not. A smaller tablet would make it even more likely that your tablet leaves the house with you, with your iPhone becoming the equivalent of a mid-grade dumbphone, used only for phone calls.

Feel free to question it, but I wouldn't be so quick to declare it not true.

1) that study compares market share. It does not measure preference. Just because more women own ereaders than men doesn't mean that women prefer e readers to tablets.

2) percentage of tablets owned by men has dropped in the past year according to the article. I assume the rest of the share was made up for by women.

A more accurate study would be to survey fire owners and rate their motivations for buying. I think the price point pushed more people off the ledge than the form factor.

That being said, yes women may prefer a smaller size. I just don't think that's the driving force behind kindle fire sales.

1) There is a reason wallets and their content are more commonly the form factor and size of a pocketable device that can be used with one hand while walking than something that would be uncomfortable if forced into a pocket and couldn't be used with one hand. Personally, I use a very money clip with a holder for my cards because I like the minimalist design.

2) We're talkng about a 7.85" iPad here. That's 8"! I've already mentioned how much much wider it would be than the Nook do to the aspect ratio. If we're talking about a tablet fitting we should be talking about how an Apple tablet would fit comfortably or at all.

I agree, I think there will be some people who would choose to forgo smartphones if they had such a tablet.

I almost did that myself. But the iPhones camera made it too valuable (not going to carry around a camera and feature phone. )

And I can get far more done with texting/email on the road with my iPhone. And Siri helps me do it more since I don't worry about texting and driving.

For the majority of people, no size of tablet can replace a smartphone

No we're talking about a vaporware device, with this particular rumor saying it might be close to 8". Other rumors have suggested closer to 7" if Apple were to offer it. My personal preference would be a 6-7" form if Apple were to build one.

I didn't enter the conversation until the claim was made that a 7" display wouldn't fit in a pocket. It does.

I'm not really concerned with the size aspect of the iPad. 7" Tablets aren't too bad considering many of us are using 3.5" Touch Screens.

What I want to see is a tablet from Apple that is roughly 350 dollars. I wouldn't care if that meant 8GB of NAND storage.

To me iCloud is the conduit that makes the proliferation of mobile devices tenable because it neatly keeps the data in sync across the devices.

Apple has just as much incentive to increase the amount of users on their online stores as Amazon does.

The new Samsung "tablet" with a flexible display that probably gets released by mid-year 2012 might be just the solution then.

It fits in a back pocket... just disregard the portion sticking out the top

But you're right... it fits. Be careful when sitting, though. Damn thing feels like a small piece of plywood on my ass!

There's no effective difference in portability between 7" and 10" tablets. If it doesn't fit into your jeans front pocket, it's far less likely to be taken out of the house. Portability is not a factor in Apple's decision to build or not build a 7" device.

But there *is* a difference in component cost. 7" screens are generally cheaper than 10" screens that use the same display technology. That's one reason why Amazon can sell the Kindle Fire at just under break-even for $200. But does Apple want to go there? Do they really feel the need to attack the low-end market with a 7" iPad mini?

Or will they do what they did with iPhone? Sell the previous year's model for $100 less. And maybe even sell the 2 year old model for $200 less. All with 9.7" screens. Apple might not make as much money on the 2 year old iPad as on the current model. But put it next to the 7" Kindle Fire at the same price, and it crushes the Fire. Faster, bigger, with a vastly better overall computing experience.

Can Apple really sell last year's iPad 2 for $100 less? And the 2010 iPad 1 for $200 less? I think it's possible. Because keeping the older models in production amortizes their development costs and factory equipment costs over a larger number of years. And Apple constantly works to get better component deals from their suppliers. They can and will because of their huge volume and because their suppliers can also amortize their equipment costs over more production years. All of which would lower Apple's cost per unit for the older model iPad, which would keep their margins up.

Why bother with a whole new iPad mini when the old 9.7" iPad could do the same job better? Just a thought.

Look at Apple's price matrix for iPod and iPad. There aren't any gaps in its usual $100 feature steps.

Where would a 7" tablet fit into Apple's product lineup?

32GB iPod Touch $299 (same price as 32GB iPhone 4S [under contract])
64GB iPod Touch $399 (same price as 32GB iPhone 4S [under contract])
16GB iPad 7" -- $299?? $399??
16GB iPad 2 Wifi $499
32GB iPad 2 Wifi $599

With iPad 7" 16GB for $299, you can buy an iPod touch with twice the capacity and a slightly smaller screen. With iPad 7" 16GB for $399, you can get a full size iPad 2 for $100 more. A 7" screen doesn't seem like enough of a benefit to lose half your storage (compared to an iPod Touch) or half your screen (compared to an iPad 2)

A 7" iPad just doesn't make any sense. The only thing to set it apart is the screen size... I don't think there's any significant advantage that makes it better than an iPod Touch AND an iPad. There are clear divisions between iPod Touch and iPad. iPad Jr or iPod touch Max would seem to just cloud Apple's very clear product categories.

Apple has no choice but to give in a produce a 7 inch iPad. Amazon has proven that their Kindle Fire has been a huge hit. Outselling the iPad at Best Buy easily. Apple has to respond but it may be too late and usually they are priced to high.

@ Mods,

When someone is posting obvious lies just to troll for reactions isn't that grounds for banning?

Its funny...
Back in the olden days before the iPad came out, I was actually railing up and down in the various comment boards about how the rumors of some 10" Apple touch pad were totally bogus. My rational at the time was that it needed to be the size of a folded sheet of print paper (the size of your average book) and that it needed to be "palm-able". You need to be able to hold it in the same way that you would hold an iPhone (only bigger) in one hand, and manipulate with the other. Especially for business use such as inventory management, Fedex/UPS, type, etc. You need to be able to walk around with the thing in your hand hanging down at your side (again, same way as holding your iphone) This concept of holding a 1.5 lb device by it's edge was ludicrous (to me) at the time.
Well, I was sure proved wrong, but we'll se what we see from here.

Please. I'm just stating whats reported. It's probably happening everywhere.

http://www.theverge.com/2011/11/29/2...ad-at-best-buy

Considering the absolute runaway success the iPad has been, why would anyone think that Apple had gotten the price point wrong on the device. Quite the opposite. For all of the clever engineering that has gone into the iPad, the real genius of the device has been delivering what it does at a reasonable price point. If the iPad had been anything close to the price that was rumoured prior to its launch, the iPad probably would have been about as successful as the tablets that came before it, which is to say, the tablet form factor might have been dead after the iPad failed to generate good sales numbers. Instead, Apple found a way to deliver a decent user experience for a reasonable price. The rest is history, so to speak.

If many, many millions is "not all that well", you are correct.

The more Fires that end up in consumers' hands right now, the better for Apple because the majority of those Fire owners will wish they hadn't gone with the Fire instead of paying more for the iPad.

I suspect that the iPad will emerge from this challenge better positioned on account of I would imagine that a lot of early Fire adopters will be trading in those units for IPad 2s checking in at around $400 when the iPad 3 is introduced.

If not, then look for Apple to respond with a somewhat larger Touch, something like 4.5 inches, before opting to bring out a 7-inch iPad.

Apple probably made fully functional 5", 7", 9" and 12" devices. So that's the one 7" that somebody might have seen.
And Steve settled for the 9.7
I have been using Tablets since 2003, and to me the one thing my iPad1 and iPhone4 are missing is a Wacon active digitizer. (Besides the present mode)
And I just run into a video for the Samsung Galaxy Note which has a Wacon digitizer,
AWESOME.

That's what Apple needs to do. Provide iPod touch at its current size and a slightly larger one to combat Kindle type product. The problem is price, since Apple always price their products much higher. Needing to do it and actually doing so is another story. I seriously doubt Apple will do such a thing. A big mistake if they don't. Android is not about to slow down, it's growing faster than anyone imagined.

Where have you been all day, Slappy?! Apple's Board has been trying to get in touch with you all afternoon. They think your ideas are top notch and make sense and want you to replace Tim Cook.

This could really go either way. On one hand Apple will take the route they have with the iPhone and keep costs down by limiting the number of models and not make a smaller version. People wanting an iPad arnt going to go android because of the screen size.

On the other hand in the last 3 years Apple seem to have gone off track with there products and started reacting to other peoples opinions. Reading Steves biography I completely get now why the iPod not being able to make playlists of the device was better as it simplified it, and why leaving out other functionality from things is better as it Keeps them simple. But for some reason iOS now let's you destroy the design with wallpapers, organise apps into a really rubbish folder implementation, iTunes has gone from the simple design that made every other player look overloaded with features to something that is overloaded with crap like ping. It's like as soon as Steve started going on medical leave people there started reading reviews and adding features that people said were needed. So maybe a smaller iPad is possible.

Another thing to support the case is the way apple runs itself as one big team. The ideas meant to be that by being one team there all focused together. But what can also ultimately happen is the top good people are all actually focused on the new product that's fun and interesting. That will be amazing, but what about the older stuff? Does anyone care about the next version of numbers? It hasn't had a new release in 3 years. Or what about OS X, that hasn't had any really amazing features added in a long time. Is the iMac or MacBook ever going to get a new design? A smaller iPad could come out just on the basis that the people who would stop it are far more interested in revolutionising tv to make the argument.

I'd like it to get an update that makes it so much better than Excel that only anti-Apple stalwarts or people who need compatibility with their Excel files from 1999 wouldn't use it.


It hasn't even been two years…

Wait, never mind. Time hates me.





So you're complaining about adding things for the sake of adding them but you're perfectly fine with changing things for the sake of changing them…

Are you high? I'm serious: Are you high right now?

The Fire poses absolutely no competition. They aren't even the same class of product.

The same with Android. What's the best-selling smartphone? The iPhone. What company makes more profit off of smartphone sales than any other? Apple. In Q3, Apple took *52%* of smartphone profits. One company, selling 2 (now 3) versions of a single phone took more profits on smartphones than ALL THE OTHER COMPANIES COMBINED!

Why in god's name would they give a crap about Android?

Amazon's entire gamble on the Fire is that they will draw in massive profits on the back-end, through content. They HAVE TO, since they are losing $10-$15 on each and every unit.

And as I said, they aren't even in the same class of product. Comparing them is like comparing a chimpanzee and a television set.

From a complete amusement perspective, I'd like to see the marketing research on the correlation between people who wear Levi jeans and use a Nook color. Buick and Kenmore should capitalize on advertising to that segment.

Again, I don't think apple has "no choice." If the Fire is causing a big drop in iPad sales (I don't think it is) I think the problem would be solved by competing with the Fire on price.

I don't think people looking to spend $500 on a tablet are choosing not to buy an iPad because of form factor. The Fire is drawing in people who don't want to spend more than $300 on a tablet.

If apple wants that segment, i think they could just as easily capture it with a 10" tablet as with an 8" one.

till you pull your pants down, and plop in the toilet
no electronic device in m back pocket
girls number 1 way of losing a phone to water ..... out back pocket into toilet