Apple's 'iPad mini' rumored with 7.85" IGZO display for $250-$300 - Page 4

Gotta say this is a pretty sad commentary on society. I'm sorry but I have a hard time believing people need a 9.7" device and an 7.8" device, plus they probably own a mobile phone. Maybe there are people who would prefer a 7" device. But if they were so popular how come Amazon has never released sales figures for the Fire?

pot meet kettle

 

Smaller and thinner does not add up to increased battery life.

He meant that you can't just scale the OS up or down to a particular screen size, you have to go in an adjust the size of the onscreen elements to keep them useable.

 

Yeah, it's all about the numbers. That last one in particular is what I've thought has kept Apple out of the smaller screen size so far. With tablet web traffic dominated by the iPad (95%), sales numbers (not shipping) also still above 80% I wonder if the numbers are there yet to justify entering the 7-8" space and undercutting their own product? But Apple has shown that they're not afraid to do that when the time is right. With more products aiming to get a foothold there now, the second half of this year might be as good a time as any...

 

1- Do you not understand that the onscreen elements have to be sized appropriately for use on each size screen?

2- what the hell? Jerk, much?

 

I don't think there's any space in the market for the old iPod Touch. My guess is that the 7" device will be a replacement for the iPod Touch in Apple's lineup. But really only Apple knows how the iPod TOuch is selling currently against the Fire and other sub-sized tablets.My second guess is that the 7" tablet would be primarily a gaming machine that can be used as a reader or some kind of social device.

 

Imagine that Apple releases this in Sept - Oct after school starts up. The kids can be talking to each other via the new device and it becomes a "must have" device. Some schools ban the devices from the classroom making them what EVERY kid HAS TO HAVE.

The speed of the components are no measure of speed of the device. Remember, iOS has been written to require a lighter performing CPU/GPU in order to preserve good battery performance. If you've grown a brain, you'd know this.

 

I cannot speak to how well an unreleased Android OS performs; even one that doesn't have to push around as many pixels as does iOS on an iPad.

So far in front of iOS that they're only addressing the "non-issue" of lag now? It's only taken them 5 years or so to look at something iOS got right from the get-go. (edit: and they didn't require 1gb of ram for it either)

I doubt Apple can make a solid 7" tab and get the margins they want at $250.  And I can't see Apple making and selling an 8" tab for less than $299.  And at $299, it won't draw many customers who are price sensitive (it's a huge jump from $199) and it could well cannibalize a lot of Apple's own sales, particularly of the iPad 2.  That's the challenge that Apple faces.  The only way this works is if Apple stops selling the iPad 2 and offers an 8" ipad at $300 and $400.  And I just can't see them doing that.  The risks to their iPad profits is tremendous.

 

Also...between the two sizes, I don't see the point of 8".  The 7" has a certain appeal.  Women can fit them in purses.  Men can fit them in suit jacket inner compartments.  Also, according to Matias Duarte, in his Verge interview, the Nexus 7 has larger top and bottom bezels to give it better ergonomics for gaming.  He says the Nexus 7 is the same size as a Sega Game Gear.  So there is definite rationale behind a 7 inch device.  But an 8" device?  Lower portability.  Inherently demands a higher price which ruins the "lower price" appeal and risks cannibalizing the 10" iPad market.  I don't see the point.

 

I think it's worth watching the interview, especially at the end where Duarte does talk about the design and why they made the design choices that they did:

 

http://www.theverge.com/2012/6/29/3126644/matias-duarte-on-android-4-1-jelly-bean-and-the-nexus-7

Edited by Jetz - 7/3/12 at 8:10pm

 

Fanboys care about this stuff.  Executives who run billion dollar corporations with profit motives do not.  They put out whatever the market demands or they risk failure.

lol, no.

Apple does whatever it feels is right, and over the past 36 years the established market has said that was wrong only a handful of times.

 

I'd argue that Apple does whatever maximizes their profits, not "whatever it feels is right".  Usually, it's really good at figuring out what's good for the user and making money in the process.  But that's not always true, either.

If I were an Apple executive, I'd be more worried about the iPod Touch than the iPad.  The Nexus 7 is the same price as the iPod Touch.  Offers a markedly better experience.  Is not dramatically less portable.  And it may actually be better sized for gaming.  The only thing it lacks is the content...which may well come if the Nexus 7 sells decently.

 

Maybe Apple should stop combining the iPod Touch line with iPhone line and launch a 5" iPod Touch.  That would be amazing for handheld gaming.

Sorry but you're out of touch with the market.

I and others wanted a smaller iPad for just book reading.  I got tired of reading books on my iPhone4.  Wife has an iPad2 for that and more.

So early this year I got a Black Berry PlayBook.  Nice screen, but not so nice for software. Some SW aspects are better than the iPad, but many are not so good.

Looking forward to Apple's iPad Mini !   Oh I also have a few friends waiting for it.

I feel $299 would be a very good price point, for a better product than those $199 tablets.  Likely the iPad2 would be fropped.

As for 7" vs 8", my BB PB has very wide borders. With less border, an iPad mini could be the same overall size.

Sure, but I wasn't implying the opposite so I don't see how that is relevant.

 

I was simply saying that if a 7.85-inch screen needs 330 PPI, it needs the same resolution as The New iPad. And that is not going to happen for a lower-cost product. The report/source is inaccurate. I'm sure a 7.85-inch iPad is coming - no dobut - but let's not believe everything people make up.

Everyone refers to the current 9.7" iPad as a 10" format. So it makes sense that we should refer to a rumored 7.85" iPad as an 8" format, no?

 

I don't get why everyone's referring to it as a 7" iPad...

 

It's a bit less than a 2" diagonal reduction, which will be somewhat more than half the screen size of the current iPad, if my math is correct?

 

There are a whole bunch of competing handhelds (I'm done calling these multi-touch mobile devices "tablets"… I think "handheld is more apt), ranging from 5" up to 12" in size… the most popular grouping seem to be exactly 7", 9.7" and 10.1".  There are also a few in the 8" size range, so if a new iPad is 7.85" in size, then it's rightly an "8-inch" category device...

 

Will Apple do this? I'm not so sure. But Steve was not always right (or more accurately, his opinion might have been right at the time, but might not remain correct forever)… markets and needs shift, and formats sometimes unexpectedly pass the 'user acceptance test'... Perhaps it's showing that a lower-priced 7~8" tablet has a substantial niche after all, and if so, I can't imagine Apple NOT filling it...

 

We have 11" and 13" MB Airs… why not 8" & 10" iPads?

Mini ipad will be useful for some people.I am waiting for its release.

The iPad mini at, say, twice the size of an iPhone with the same form factor would work. That is, it can run the springboard and retina apps written for the iPhone at full resolution, but - obviously - without retina. So a universal app designed for the iPhone and present day iPad would look like the iPhone version on the  7" iPad but use different UI on the 10" model. 

 

This would keep the 10" iPad as a premium model as it would look better than a large iPhone, people would use the cheaper one for reading and as a larger iPhone.

 

other advantages - it already has a huge number of apps available and you can download all your phone apps to it, and they will just work.

 

 

You bought a RIM Playbook and it's me who's out of touch with market?

Would an iPad mini without a bezel be sensible? You could then hold it in one hand, just like an iPhone, even people with small hands. While looking for a mockup, I found this, pretty cool:



http://tablet-news.com/2012/02/29/futuristic-ipad-concept-uses-no-bezel-at-all-magnets-to-attach-to-other-ipads-video/

I don't think it's feasible now to have no bezel. I also don't think it's sensible as the bezel creates a natural border where you can place your hands/fingers There are certainly uses for having no bezel and technologies that would around it but I think all such effort to make it a viable feature are still many years away. You can see in the mockup video (where things can be made ideal) that when he unlocks it the icons are far too close to the left edge where his left hand is using it to be comfortable. We have white space on paper in books for a reason and we've had them there even when paper was overly expensive.

As for the magnets or NFC in the pic I'm not sure what use that would be. First of all, I don't get how the magnets being on the edge could then make the two pieces solid and rigid without an interlocking system that isn't present on the two beveled edges. You'd have to connect them with a Higgs 5-sigma intensity (just making stuff up now 😷).

Second, I don't NFC at all for transferring the data. The only use I can see for NFC in such a device is for verification when they get within 6"/150mm of each other but if the goal is to wait until they touch then that makes it a moot point and you'll still need a much faster connector, like WiFi, to stream video to the 2nd device so both can double as one monitor. You could use a physical connector since they are touching but since there doesn't seem to be any pins along the side to facilitate that it's going to have to be wireless.

I know for a fact they don't. It's nonsense when people keep saying this is all that Apple cares about. Doing this is the easiest way to make stuff that no one would actually want.

They do work to maximize their profits. All for-profits companies do. The difference between Apple and many other tech companies is that Apple's maximizing is looking at the long term while many of these tech companies can't see past the next quarter results. They all have the same goal but they go about it very differently.

They'd need to have a system to weed out finger contact from holding the edges from finger contacts intended to be control signals. Even if you do that, those fingers holding the edge would still cover up some of the screen. I just don't think it's well-advised. The bezel could be narrower, but I don't see where no bezel is a good idea for a hand held product.

 

There was a long standing myth that Apple was some kind of altruistic hippy commune building products for the good of mankind. It's total BS.

 

Apple is driven by one singular objective - to make as much money as possible.

You say it's not worth the trouble, yet you're here. Which is the lie, your post content, or the fact that you've made 10 posts to say it's not worth posting here?

In other news: bye.


I don't remember that one at all.

 

Shaun UK should stick to trolling at macrumors, better yet Engadget so I don't have to read his drivel.

 

 

.

 

I disagree with both your points.

 

On price.  It's not trivial to ask the most price-sensitive consumers to shell out 50% more.  Only Apple fans used to paying a hundred more than comparable tech for Apple's quality wouldn't think so.  Paying $100 more to go from a Samsung Tab to an iPad is not really that contentious.  It's maybe 25% more.  Paying 50% more to go from a Nexus 7 (with 26% more pixels per inch) to an iPad Mini is going to be a tough sell.  Maybe Apple will get existing Macheads to buy them.  But it's going to a tough sell in any store carrying the Nexus 7 right beside it.

 

On size.  We're talking 0.85".  How much bezel can they knock off before handling becomes an issue?  There's a reason they made the Nexus 7 with bigger bezels at the top and bottom (gaming ergonomics).  But the iPad doesn't have that option.  Ergo, it's going to be huge for a mini-tablet.

Steve probably didn't care about profit as much, but Cook, definitely a more profit centric guy. Which is actually why they might NOT release this because an iPad mini will hurt the profit of 10" iPad.

The expectations of people on these boards is beyond all association with reality.  You might as well say the new iPad will cure bad breath and has magical stain-removing properties for your clothing.  By the "smaller/thinner/better battery life" logic my iPhone battery should last a week in continuous use.

 

1- Yes.  What's the big deal?  Android can run their OS on dozens of different sizes and configurations.  Why again can't iOS?  If you tell me that the reason is developers and apps- then that's bogus.  There are plenty of the SAME app that run on the iphone/ipod touch and the iPad.  Again- the same app.  While there are iPad and iPhone specific apps, there are also combos.  We're not talking about some fragmented mess that android has- were talking about a potential 3... count it, THREE devices.  That's all.

 

2- Not being a jerk.  It's just annoying that people keep mentioning pointless quotes from a guy who has been dead for almost a year.  Did I think Jobs was awesome?  Yes I did- he should have half a semester dedicated to him in every business school.  He did things no one else could and was amazing.  But- he's dead.  His quotes mean jack squat.  Hell, his quotes didn't mean much when he was alive!  And yet people keep quoting him as if it means a thing about Apple today.  I realize Steve's influences run deep in Apple as a mentor and teacher.  But Tim Cook is a completely different guy, and Apple isn't the exact same company.  Some might argue for better and some might say for worse.  I, personally, think it's for better as a shareholder, but I totally understand (and even agree) with the other side of the coin.

But my point is- enough with the Jobs quotes- they bring as much credibility to an argument as a Digitimes article.

Yep, you're correct!!!