'Exciting' Sept. could see Apple intro new iPhone, iPad 'mini' - Page 2

 

I agree that most Fire purchases are based on brand name and the association with Amazon.  Especially with older users who just want to keep reading books but see a value in going digital, they want to "stay with Amazon" (although that fact makes me want to slap them), and just get a good eReader.  These people are unlikely to want or be in the market for anything more than an eReader and would not normally buy the iPad anyway.  

 

However I think you are making a couple of assumptions here that are simply not in evidence.  First, there is really no evidence at all the the Fire is "successful" and sells in anything like reasonable numbers.  There is on the other hand much anecdotal evidence that it's a very unsuccessful product and that customer experience with it is awful and that the return rates are high.  Amazon purposely never releases sales figures in order to mask situations like this.  Without the facts, perception is king, and while the perception is that the Fire is a "competitor" and "does well" this is in fact pure speculation from reviewers operating completely in the dark.  

 

Secondly, You are assuming that the Fire is a better, more popular choice than the basic Kindle, for which all the arguments you make for the Fire can also be made.  Again, facts are few and far between but the information that has leaked out so far would seem to indicate that the original Kindles do better than the Fire's and are more popular overall.  

 

The Fire 2.0 might do better, but literally all actual evidence on the matter shows the 1.0 version to be a slow, clunky, hard to use, error-prone POS that doesn't actually sell well at all and hasn't cannibalised any markets or put any competing products on the ropes etc. It's to Amazon's credit that they can work the propaganda machine to the point that most people actually believe the exact opposite of this, because it isn't really true at all.  

As a parent of someone approaching 5 a iPad/iTouch at approx. 8in would be welcome the same is probably true for many schools.

 

Anyway, the present iPad seems too big for kids and not fantastic for games play - a smaller iPad would thus have an audience, now, whether we call it a iTouch or iPad is debatable - but a market exists with those with little fingers who desire a all in one solution for their educational/viewing/ game playing - so why not, and if Apple is to drive up its capitalisation, the younger it grabs them the better 0 a US$500 price point for spec's similar to today's iPad 3 would be necessary, this based on the fact its already old technology and that the next iPad is now being worked on that even I as a sceptic would invest in.

 

As for the Apple TV, or large iMac, forget Siri, the future is hand gestures and it now exists in the form of 'Leap Motion', so forget your fondle toys, I'd be blown away by Apple purchasing Leap Motion and incorporating the Tech into a high end computer/ come monitor, come games machine - now this really is the future!!!!!!!

My post never disagreed with your 7" for purse idea, perhaps I should clarified my last paragraph I was referring to 7". I've read many a thread on AI with comments of how 7" was PERFECT for pants pocket, so I was kind of responding to the months long regular posts about that.

Agree with you on the purse thing. I work 50/50 in china and most all guys carry something the size of an iPad shaped "murse".
Edited by antkm1 - 6/4/12 at 8:14am

 

Every activity that you perform on an iPad would be adversely affected by using a smaller screen. Watching movies. Much worse. Reading. Defintely worse. Gaming. For sure not as enjoyable and developers would be more restricted with what they can do on a smaller screen. Browsing. Are you kidding me. Name any app and without question, having more screen to work with is a good thing. Pick up an iPad and in terms of screen real estate I can't imagine anyone finding that the screen is just too much for what they want to do. As such, there has to be a rather compelling advantage to justify making everything you do a lot less enjoyable. 

 

In the case of a device like the Touch, the advantage is substantial enough to justify the penalties paid. There are just so many scenarios in which a device sized like a Touch can be used for which the iPad simply can't. In the case of the rumoured 7-inch iPad (really more like 8 inches at 7.85) it would seem the biggest advantage would be that some women could fit them into some sizes of purse. 

 

If this is about the weight of the current iPad, that is an issue but I believe there will be solutions over time that do not involve reducing screen real estate which, really, does transform the overall experience in a bad way. 

 

Besides, considering the iPad is a runaway success and dramatically outselling any other tablet, I would suggest the sweet spot is right where the iPad is positioned, not down in the 7-inch range. 

 

Really, I don't think the 7-inch form factor is suitable for a tablet. It's too large to be truly portable and too small to be as enjoyable to use as an iPad. The worst of both worlds, so to speak. Compromises all around, which is not Apple's style. The Touch makes sense because of its outstanding portability and the iPad because of its decent screen real estate. The so called tweener devices are not outstanding at anything. To be fair, being lighter, they do have an advantage in terms of holding them for long stretches but this is a temporary advantage and while I wish my iPad 2 were lighter, I've managed to enjoy it even when using it for extended periods. Lighter is something Apple is good at and the increase in weight brought on with the third iPad version is a direction I'm sure we'll see reversed soon. When that happens, the iPad 10-incher will simply come across as the ideal product. So apart from a few women being unable to slip the iPad into their purses, who loses from Apple staying the course and simply engineering out the iPad's lone downside, namely weight. 

 

Just had my nephew visiting and he's all of six yet he absolutely loved using my iPad 2. No complaints about the screen being too big for him to handle and given the choice between the iPad and a Touch, he much prefers the iPad. The iPad is a much better gaming device than smaller products and because of the bigger screen easier for children to master. As well, getting two people gaming at the same time on one device is an option with the iPad and impossible, really, with something like a Touch. My nephew and slightly older niece were on the iPad co-operatively playing together. Believe me, that's not a common occurrence. 

 

If you think the current iPad is too big for kids, hand one over to one and watch what happens. If my nephew and niece are typical, I think you'll find that you are mistaken. 

 

Why in heck would Apple use an aluminum back with little bits of glass at top & bottom? This design seems very unlikely to me. I think the photo is B.S. No way iPhone 5 will be this ugly.

 

I think the iPod touch being sized up with the 6th iPhone will put an end to this idiocy about a smaller iPad.

 

 

Fortunately it isn't. The 5th iPhone looks pretty darn good to me:

 

My iPod Touch is my iPad Nano. 

My iPod Touch is my iPad Nano.

 

It is indeed ugly, but there are good reasons for it from a functional perspective.  If you consider that they are changing the design for manufacturing reasons instead of for reasons that concern the actual users of the device it makes sense. 

 

The centre section is a "unibody" (except it isn't technically) part, machined out of a block of aluminium or steel.  This makes it very easy to attach all the parts in one action with solid screws to this much more solid piece.  It makes the phone more rigid, it presumably would lead to fewer steps in manufacturing etc.  The end pieces are attached afterwards and are the main antennas, thus the glass bits on the back to give greater separation from the metal body.  The longer screen similarly helps out their partners in terms of app creation while not also not really helping out the end user at all.  

 

IMO this year's iPhone is all about making it easier for their manufacturing partners and reducing breakage and costs while doing the usual slightly faster, slightly smaller/thinner thing.  

Even if the Nook Simple Touch is a good device, how does that negate anything I said?

A 5" device is very different than a tablet.

 

Not if they care about keeping their contracts and if Apple has a choice in who to get the supplies from. 

 

That said, they probably don't anyway. If you look at what they are talking about it's more of the same rumors as everywhere else. And the sources are classic "folks close to the matter" as used in sketchy tech and celeb rumors. 

 

It's very possible that none of this is true. Well maybe the Sept part but the rest not even close. After what happened last year with the teardrop that didn't even turn out to be the iPod touch I wouldn't be shocked if this duotone is also completely fake, commissioned as a limited run prototype to a company they said they were considering adding to the production chain so this was their test run as well. And it's totally fake. After last year many folks are starting to doubt the rumor mill, blow it twice and it could blow up in the collective face of blogs etc. Once folks stop believing that the stories might be true the blogs stop pushing to republish them, eventually they stop asking for and especially paying for tips. And Tim gets his 'double down'

 

I myself am not going to be shocked if the iPhone 6th Gen looks like the 4th and the 5th Gen with the same width and height and same materials. Perhaps it will be slightly thinner thanks to switching to thinner displays and glass but that's about it. And I'm talking mm thinner not something immediately noticeable. Perhaps the metal band will be thinner also and yes maybe the glass edges will be curved just a wee bit to smooth them. The insides will be where the action is. 

 

There will be no iPad mini. Now or ever. That's what I expect as the truth. What we get instead is a revamp of the iPod Touch to a new 5 inch model. It will have the same shape as the iPad but with all the non 3g internals of the iPhone. It will be the device that will be pushed as the one you use to run the house with your Apple TV (new Remote app released also), your Nest etc. It's the one you give the kiddies to play games on rather than your iPhone or big brothers school iPad. Because it's the iPod Touch it runs, like the former models, the iPhone apps not the iPad ones so developers don't have to revamp anything so long as their iPhone app is Retina compatible. And so on. 

 

Bingo. And they're still claiming that Apple needs a response. Which is idiotic. Apple sold more 10 inch 'new' iPads its opening weekend than Amazon sold Kindles during the month of December. Not just the Fire, but all models. And if you look at the boards, a good half of the Fire buyers returned them because it was either too slow, too limited in apps or they were pissed about the whole 'you must be logged in but we don't ask for your password to buy anything and there are no parental controls' nonsense. Between all that, where's the threat  

 

There's another rumor going around that Amazon is looking to make a 10 inch Fire. Why? Because they think the size is the issue that is killing their sales. They are wrong but hey they can try. THey might have a shot now that they fixed that account nonsense

 

Oh and when the iPad mini gets closer to expected release, you can count on a bunch of rumors about issues that will delay it. All just CYA tricks by the same analysts. Same with the TV set. 

 

 

Well, like it or not, lot's of people prefer a smaller size iPad, it's just much easier to hold and read stuffs with 1 hand using a 7-8 inch screen than a 10 inch screen, because it's smaller and lighter.

 

Not producing an iPad mini is leaving money on the table. Steve might not care, but Tim will do it.

 

Which explains why the iPad is selling so poorly. 70% of shipped tablets and 95% of tablets being used.

 

 

Because if there's one thing people want, it's smaller screens. That iPhone nano sure was the right decision. 3.5" is WAY too big.

 

 

I think people should stop thinking they can tell us what Apple's executives would do.

 

See my first comment in this thread (which is probably about 3 up from this) for my thoughts on that issue. 

 

 

I think it was a combo of price, ecosystem and needs. Folks that really don't have the overwhelming urge for a full tablet cause they don't see the logic behind one when they can just get a 'real computer' but are in the amazon ecosystem cause the wife has a Kindle saw the cheap price and figured why not

 

 

Because that's Apple's new tactic. Do everything Steve naysayed now that he's dead and can't stop them. Hate to tell you but no. Aside from the fact that the issues were all debated out before he died, you still have Sir Jony. He if no one else understood exactly why Steve said no to a smaller iPad (not tablet form device but iPad with its apps etc). In fact he's probably the one that made the prototypes, ran the tests and gave Steve the data about how bad that size for an iPad would be.

 

Now making a 5-7 inch tablet form is not out of the question. they never said no to that notion. Just the iPad and the iPad apps. So they could size up the iPod Touch to that range, give it new life and they aren't negating what Steve said because he was replying to the direct question of a smaller iPad, not a larger iPod Touch. 

 

 

I have to side with TS on this one. Steve talked of changing Television, not THE television. That's content and that doesn't require a tv to do it. Apple's about leaving things to the folks that do it best. So yeah they will likely leave the tv sets to the boys that have it figured out.

 

If by some form you mean a larger Apple Cinema Display (say 40 inches) with a thinner body, vesa adapter for wall mounting in the box (or even already on the back with some new stand attachment hardware), Retina display and HDMI inputs. But without all the hassle of licensing the patents for tv tuners etc. Sure I expect that will be made

 

 

There have been numerous studies showing that the younger the child the bigger things need to be for visual focus. Their eyes aren't mature enough for small text etc. Not until about 10 years old for the early bloomers. Thats why all those read to learn books have huge type and lots of white space. Why the kids use that paper with the huge spaces for learning to write etc. 

 

So it stands to reason that an ipad, which has much bigger and cleaner graphics typically, is more comfortable for them to see. And the bigger device feels less toy like to them, more grownup. Adding another reason why they would rather use it. 

 

Darling I'm all of 120 lbs if I'm soaking wet with a 25 lb bag of tools on my shoulder. I have tiny hands, especially for someone that is 5'6". Useful when you're working as a Grip since I can get my hands into basically any rig to hang and adjust lights etc. 

 

I have zero issue holding my iPad with one hand. Didn't with my iPad 2, or my original iPad. Course the reason for that could be that my arms and hands have gotten more exercise than just using them to blog my personal opinions as if they are statements of universal fact. 

 

Oh and TS is right. Folks need to can the whole "Steve wouldn't" "Steve is rolling in his grave" "Now that Steve is dead" nonsense. Tech doesn't run that fast so many of those things Steve started and you don't know Steve or Tim to know how they think or feel about things. So stop trying to act like you do. 

I call BS on this photo: It doesn't say 'iPhone 5'. 

Apple rarely, if ever, announces two major product upgrades in any one month.  And they certainly never announce a brand new product (e.g. the "iPad mini") in the same month as another major product upgrade.

 

Each all-new product gets several months in the spotlight on Apple's home page.  Each updated product gets several weeks in the spotlight on Apple's home page.  You might say that the "iPad mini" isn't a totally new product in that it's kind of like a shrunken iPad 1.  But it would still require at least a month to itself on the Apple home page (and in Apple press releases.)  Especially if it has new screen technology...

 

I'd list all the times this has happened, but I'm pressed for time right now.

 

 

2008. Penryn Mac Pro. One week later: MacBook Air. That's just one instance. There have been plenty more.

I hope Apple drops naming game and call next iPhone "new iPhone" like they did with iPad

I've always wondered why, if the Fire was doing so well, wouldn't Amazon release sales figures?  We get figures across the board but never anything just for Kindle Fire.  If someone isn't willing to release sales data it makes me skeptical that the product is actually selling well.  Techies and wall street analysts are always looking for a idevice "killer".  They gave that distinction to the Fire before they had any hard data to support it.  Rather than admit they were wrong, they keep pushing this rumor that Apple will release a smaller iPad to compete with the Fire.

Ah but will Jony do it?  At the D10 conference Tim made it pretty clear he's not much involved in design and he didn't give a very convincing answer when asked who was the product curator so my guess is it's not him either.

I judge the Kindle Fire to be successfull only on the grounds that it has name recognition. Does it have any buzz relative to the iPad? Nope, nada, not even close, BUT, in relation to other tablets out there, it is in the discussion with people.

Since nobody has Amazon's numbers, none of us can speculate on its sales. And there is no chance that they are close to the iPad, but, the device is known, and Amazon is the closest competitor than can offer a well built, and respected media ecosystem that rivals iTunes.

Within the tablet arena, Amazon is the only company that I can see that would offer Apple any competition. Granted, that competition is similar to the Olympic Basketball Dream Team's closest rival, but considering the seemingly insurmountable lead Apple has, Amazon has done a nice job for itself.
Edited by bmason1270 - 6/4/12 at 12:05pm

 

The only thing that matters to Apple is: if they made a 7" iPad would it sell? I think it would.

 

Let me give you an example: The iPod Nano. Why do we need the Nano when we have the iPod Touch? An yet it sells in the millions. Strange that.

 

It's exactly the same principle with the iPad Mini. I know lots of people who think the 10" version is too big and heavy to carry around. So they mostly use it at home.

 

Forget the other 7" tablets - look at the Kindle. That's been a roaring success. I see loads of people using them every day on the train, at lunchtime in the park, on holiday. Why? Coz it fits nicely in a ladies handbag or a coat pocket (maybe not in your jeans pocket but it fits nicely in a coat pocket).

 

So I think there is definitely a sizeable market for a 7" iPad Mini which is why I'm confident Apple will make one.

At the D10 conference Tim said Apple was going to double down on secrecy also so I doubt you'd get a convincing answer on whether he had breakfast on any given morning.
 

Sadly there comes a time in an Apple-lover's life when the wife just has to go. I'm sure by now she's seen it coming, it's been you and Siri for almost a year now.

I could see Apple introducing a 7 inch ePad with a color e-ink display for schools and e-book readers. Multi-touch but not capable of everything a full blown iPad can do. 

 

But I don't see them releasing a smaller iPad just for the sake of filling screen size gaps.Apple is about user experience and filling needs in markets they feel they can do some good in. 

After putting the 163 PPI TN panels into production since at least 2007 I think that would be a much cheaper way to go than creating an entirely new assembly line with unproven tech. Is anyone using color eInk today?

If we assume that Apple will continue with 3 years of iPhones for each major market, poorer markets not withstanding, then they will be dropping the iPhone 3GS later this year for the iPhone 4, iPhone 4S and 6th gen iPhone which will leave a large gap in their 163 PPI TN panel production. It does make sense in many ways for them to continue to utilize this production to their fullest for inexpensive tablets.

 

I'm not sure I have a reaction image for this. 

 

 

So what's the point?

Shouldn't the headline read "Some analyst has opinion about Apple, rumor site re-posts it for click traffic"? Apple hasn't promised anything in September: this is one analyst's speculation.

If the iPad Mini actually exists, I wonder if it's a new device for the future Apple TV - remote control..anyone? But if it is released, I plan to pick one up. I have a Nook Reader and would simply replace it with the iPad Mini. It's form factor/size is easier as a reader. The Mini can also be used as a remote control for your "future" entertainment center. It can control the new Thermostat developed by an ex-Apple engineer - which I may pick up as well. And most importantly most Android Tablets don't offer the robustness of an Apple device. Believe me I've tried several models, and compared to my wife's iPad 2 they cannot duplicate Apples functionality.

 

Here's a thought, maybe the iPad Mini will be a gaming device with the functionality of the iPad.  I'm not much of a gamer but Apple always seems to surprise us.

 

Now for those negative people that can't wait to call me an Apple Fanboy..rest easy.  My cell phone is the First Generation Droid, My wife has the HTC Rhyme, I plan to upgrade (in  a few month) to either the Samsung G3 or possibly the Sony Xperia S - if it's ever released for Verizon with Ice Cream 4.0.

 

 

Ok, may the negative comments begin......

Hahahaha!!!!!

She loves Apple too though

 

Agreed.  A 5" iPod Touch would be awesome...especially if it had a 4G option.  The 7" Fire sorta fits in my wife's purse (purse is big enough, just not with the Fire AND all the existing stuff that's in there) but a 5" would be better.  Especially after you add a cover to keep all the other crap from scratching the hell out of it.

 

A 4-5" iPod touch with a single or dual core A5 at the current resolution would sell very well IMHO.  I bought the fire instead of the iPod Touch because it was faster and bigger.

 

Primary use is games and movies for the kids. 

 

I can see an Apple AV receiver paired with a display that was nothing but power, airplay and a HDMI jack or two.  All the smarts would be in the AVR or iOS device paired with the display.  In the most minimalist install the display has only one cord attached to it for power.  The Apple AVR would connect to the cable box, blu-ray player, etc.

 

Amazon pretty much only releases the bare minimum of numbers they're required to for being a public company.  I think they're afraid if they started putting actual facts out there that there is no rational way to justify their stock price's markup, and it would instantly lose half its value.  If they started releasing sales numbers for Kindles people might want to know details about their actual profitable products!

I think you meant designs that will blend in with other Samsung devices 

Why hasnt anyone realized that this is an anti-apple campain? When the iPhone 4 was "lost" in 2010 it clearly looked like an Apple product...

This thing looks like doodoo. Not to mention that a 16:9 screen would make 700,000 apps useless...

I do not understand how can websites post those pictures...

So lame and ugly.

Its lame just to think that a 16:9 iPhone is possible.

 

Have you heard of the Amazon Kindle? It's the same size as a paperback, making it quite convenient to pop into a hand bag and read on the train.

 

The iPad on the other hand, is much larger, and so much less convenient for people who are primarily interested in reading.

First, I never said it was a good device, however, it does work great for its intended purpose. And I'm not trying to negate anything you've said. I just think differently about the matter. I was merely pointing out that the nook's 5" screen size, aspect ratio and form factor would make a better device than the touch, and would provide a smaller form factor alternative to the 10" iPad, based on my experience. And I state that argument because I don't see the need for 3 form factors between the rumored 4" screen and 10" screen. So that was my alternative, to drop the 3.5" (or rumored 4") touch in favor of a bigger screen, and (with a smaller side bezels) create a new form factor that would provide more portability/pocketability yet still be big enough for practical use. That would leave the iPhone with the smallest screen. But in all reality the two devices , despite their size and OS, do have entirely different uses/user-groups, and I have very rarely seen someone who owns both. Unless you're the type that must own EVERYTHING APPLE MAKES yet only use about 2 or 3 devices on a regular basis.

Think of it is way...just for kicks. If you're out and about anywhere where you have enough time to use a device bigger than even the current touch/phone, you'll probably have a bag with you or a place to store the device while on commute (bag, glove box, etc.). Like many have said, the #1 reason most people want a smaller iPad is price. Just read these forums enough and one can see that's the most important reality is that most people considering the iPad, can't justify th cash and would settle on a smaller one and sacrifice a little usability for affordability. Of course more portability is good too, but if the iPad was $299, lets be honest here, I really doubt we would have nearly AS MANY people complaining it was too big or not portable enough.

For me, I've never been out anywhere for any length of time where I wish I had my iPad over my iPhone. Well mainly because of the fact that i dont see the need to pay for two 3g bills and then id have two devices with me, and only one makes calls to anyone on the go. Sure I take my iPad on trips (plane/car/train/hotel) and to a freind's house. But i either have a bag with me, or I put it in my glovebox or he passenger seat while on commute or it sits in the hotel as an alternative to a laptop.

And yes, part of me wishes I had a little bit bigger screen than my iPhone. So I am touting the argument a bit subjectively, but I do think from a economy of scale POV, having two well designed form factors is better than 3, just to have 3 sizes...mainly because of what I said about cannibalization.

I think everyone keeps talking about 7.85" because of pixel scaling, but we have already seen in the new iPad pixel scaling by PPI isn't proportional...since the new iPad's PPI is different from the iPhone. Plus the current iPad is actually a 9.7" screen. So to make an 7.85" display, IMO is just not enough smaller to justify. Actually, 6.85" would be exactly 1/2 between 4" and 9.7".

If any device is released with a screen between the touch and the iPad, I'd be very willing to bet money, there will still be complaints that it's not the size he/she desires. Which was another argument for something slightly smaller than 7.85" and bigger than 3.5".

There...did that clarify for you?