iPad mini renderings offer best look yet at rumored tablet - Page 2

Amazon is now officially doomed.

So now nobody goes to the beach or sits outside at all except people who want skin cancer. These comments on AI get more bizarre all the time.
I own 2 iPads. An iPad is too heavy to carry for long periods of time- an iPhone and a feather-lite Kindle with a month's worth of charge works just fine. Why don't you just get a map like I'm frequently asked to sub for StreetView?

I love the "the iPad is too heavy" whining.

My iPad weighs considerably less than half of many of the books I might carry around instead. And I often carried around 2 or more books.

So explain to me how a 1.5 pound iPad is so much worse than multiple books weighing 2-5 pounds? Not to mention that I can often avoid carrying around my 5 pound laptop by using the iPad.

Perhaps you should spend some time at the gym.

Hmm.. sorry but I don't know, what StreetView has to do with anything I mentioned. ? -

1) The iPad isn't too heavy for the logical reasons you mention but I do think the next 10" iPad will be significantly lighter thanks to 32nm/28nm and any iPad mini will be built around its lightness so it can be held in one hand for indefinite periods.

2) It's funny how iSheldon/Teckstud makes all these pejorative comments about Apple products but then slides in that he thinks the Kindle is "feather light" while ignoring all its shortcomings. If Apple released an eInk device (which they won't) he'd complain that Apple is copying Amazon, that it doesn't have Maps, doesn't have the same App Store, only in black and white, etc.

Cool. But the game changer here would be color ware options like the iPod nano.
But as for retina display, hell no.
People would forgo the more expensive iPad for the mini. And as I think about it, there won't be no damn color ware options.
The mini is just a kindle challenger.

Personally, I'm waiting for a -larger- iPad. Something closer to the ubiquitous 8.5x11 sheet of paper in size. A little heavier is okay with me, and I'd happily pay more too.

I'm 54, and I keep having to tap-to-zoom-in (a very nice feature, BTW) to read news articles, like I'm doing now. It all feels a little bit cramped on a 10 inch screen-I can't imagine trying to use a smaller one.

 

I've believed it was happening since we saw that orange mold. It's not a good idea, but when has Apple only ever done good ideas? This one'll just be more costly than most.

Interesting… that falls into the same category as the xMac people. Let's see… 

 

"Express that if Apple made a product that will never come to fruition (or is physically impossible), it would be the first product you buy from Apple. Since they do not, your complaining about all things Apple is justified."

How's that?

 

And thanks for the idea. That's definitely going on the list in some form.

I think they have to position this iPad as the quality device in an already crowded category where the price has been set low. So that means it has to be aluminum, serious white and black only, with a good screen, denser than the iPad 2 and probably better looking than the other ~160 ppi screens out there because of IPS.

Gazoobee will not get his stupid plastic back, and fortunately he won't get to complain that his favorite Barbie-doll pink was not picked over electric pink or whatever. For this I am glad. He doesn't get what Apple is doing in general, and he is way off, deliberately and perversely, about the opening purpose of this tablet.

I could be wrong also, but I figure this Pad is meant to raise the bar on quality in an already plasticked-down device category. This way kids can get into the ecosystem early and have their aesthetics calibrated for a lifetime of higher expectations.

When lowering manufacturing costs can being the price down to the iPod nano level, then we might see colors—anodized aluminum, not plastic. But we would also see retina screens and better cameras on the high end at the same time, so how would they differentiate these from the toyPads?

And why exactly would I go hiking with 5 pounds worth of books attached to me which us what I was responding to?
Edited by iSheldon - 10/5/12 at 7:46am

Excuse me- but what crystal ball app do you use?
Au contraire as I've stated I would buy one.

When I used to go hiking - before my 4 kids took control of all my time :) - I'd regularly bring several Audubon books with me to identify birds, trees, insects, etc.

 

Now, I never considered bringing an iPad with me, but the iPhone is a great substitute for those.

Why would it be cost prohibitive to produce different colors?

I want one of these so badly. 

uh-oh
That's less than 7MM for the December quarter. Way less.

iSheldon:
To get some exercise. And we get a iSheldon-thread-free to boot.

I want one of these so badly. 

 

 

Then I'll have 

 

MBP (given to me by employer but I don't use it at all. I rarely if ever even turn it on.)

MBA

Ipad

Ipad Mini

Iphone

Shuffle (given to me but I don't use it)

The pricing point on the iPad Mini is the most critical Apple have faced in recent years for a new product. Having created the pad market place they have seen a sub set of 7 inch devices some eReaders some Android driven tablets create a market that the current iPod Touch and iPad line up does not reach. With the retail price of the iPad 2 here in the UK at £329 for the basic model and £249 for the new iPod Touch the iPad Mini needs to sit in the middle to make sense at around the £269 -£289 mark. Unless Apple reduce the price on the iPod Touch (unlikely given that they only lauched it a few weeks ago) they will look to position the iPad Mini as the top end 7inch tablet, the Apple brand will do much along with the fact that it will be fully functional tablet not just an eReader to justify the extra cost.  I'd love to see Apple be bold and position at the £249 price point and move the iPod Touch down to £229 and really create a stir in this market space, but if you're hoping to see a sub £200 Apple tablet I think you might be dissapointed. We'll soon see!

Same thing I was thinking.

You can now add spaghetti arm weaklings to the list of people that only buy Apple products lol.

BEST POST EVER !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I don't know. Why would you take an iPad with you hiking?

Some people don't know how to enjoy the outdoors.

If it happens, I'll get one for the wife for Christmas.

The side bezels are too wide in his mockup.

Looks nice but I'll take the full size model thanks. I have yet to own an iPad, so I want the full experience for my first buy.

Let's see if they finally include phone capabilities - could be a life saver, quite literally.

 

Why would they?

Words from a wise Apple genius.

 

 

 

Words from the kingpin of them all.

 

 

My point: Don't knock a competitors product before you try it.

 

It's quite obvious that Apple realizes there IS a market for finger-sharpening-required tablets.

 

This is to those naysayers who thought that Samsung and Amazon's idea of a tablet in-between a 10" and a mobile phone is a train wreck waiting to happen.

 

I specifically remember some on here stated that Apple will "never" release a mid size tablet when there is the iPad and the iPhone.

 

I have names of those individuals but I wont post them.

 

Heres to eating your own words (of many).

Edited by Galbi - 10/6/12 at 7:51pm

 

I have, which enables me to knock 'em. It's just not big enough. Not even talking about the UI or the UX. It's teensy.

If on or about October 10 invitations go out, this thing is a go. If, on the other hand, if we get some claims that yield problems have delayed this device for a few more weeks, forget about it. There is no iPad Mini coming.

I have to think that if this thing is for real, the iPad 2 will be discontinued and it will come in at around $399. After all, if the 4-inch Touch is $299, how realistic is it to think a 7-inch iPad would come in for much less than $400.

I don't get how we now have a reversal of logic about technology when it comes to this rumoured product. We all know that when you shrink tech to fit into a smaller package it costs more money, but for some reason this doesn't apply to this one product?

If you use that scenario on the iPhone and iPad the iPad should cost a lot more simply because it's bigger, but that's not accurate. Even with the Retina display, crazy powerful GPU to push that display, and huge battery it's still cheaper than the iPhone.

This rumoured iPad mini is much the same way except it's pushing the not envelope in performance, it's pushing the envelope in weight and cost reduction. It's rumoured to use the same PPI as the original iPhone and Touch. That''s 1/2 the PPI of the Touch. If it doesn't use in-cell touch or have full sRBG it could actually be a cheaper overall display than the new Touch display.

I agree, and have said so all along since these mock-ups have been showing up.

Now I could be wrong, and often am, but it just doesn't make sense to me. Unless Apple is gearing this thing solely at the gamer and movie watching audience in landscape orientation -- and while that may be a critical base for it, I don't see Apple doing this -- then the bezels in portrait orientation are simply too small to hold it comfortably in one hand using the thumb, without accidentally touching the screen.

I don't see any reason for Apple to change the general iPad dimensions when shrinking it smaller. The reason iPhones have no side bezels (and arguably Apple intends it to be used primarily in portrait orientation) is because it is gripped in the palm. A mini tablet is held the same way as the regular one, whether it is 16:9, 16:10, or 4:3.

Also, considering Apple's iPhone 4-5 is all retina displays, along with the iPod Touch line, I find it hard to believe the iPad mini wouldn't be either, thus conforming their entire iOS product line to the same display resolution, if not aspect ratio. I mean, retina is one major way Apple can distinguish itself from other 7" tablets, aside from style. But style alone is not going to allow Apple to charge a premium in the sub-tablet space. They need to raise the bar for other manufactures and motivate customers used to budget tablets to spend a "little more" for better quality. Actually the more I think about it, the move to 16:9 in iPhone and iPod Touch necessitates a 16:9 mini-tablet., while the iPad will be 4:3, and who knows, perhaps if Apple keeps the smaller iPhone 4/s form factor alongside the 5 form factor, then it will be conformed to the slightly narrower 1.33:1, from the 1.5:1 bringing it in line with the iPad for scalability.

1) He says they are too wide and you agree by saying they are too small?

2) You also say it's for a gamer and movie watching audience because of the side bezels being smaller than you would find comfortable but don't seem to realize that the bezel width is not a determination of the aspect ratio of the display. These mockups are all using a 4:3 display.

3) The reason the iPhone can have smaller side bezels is because of the size and weight. Because this would be considerably smaller and lighter than the 10" iPad it can have smaller side bezels and still be held comfortably with one hand without obstructing the display.

4) There is nothing that necessitates a 16:9 tablet and nothing that ever shown the iPad mini to be anything other than 4:3.

 

Do you say that because we're at the point where the buildup to it is… Hmm. Can't articulate it right now. Maybe I should wake up more. 

 

You're agreeing with me, but are asking for the opposite.

 

I said the 'side' bezels are too wide, not too narrow:

 

(given that the home button is on the bottom, I think you'll now see what I mean by the side bezels)

 

 

P.S. The Apple logo is a tad too big, also.

 

The whole reason why the side bezels don't need to be a wide as a regular iPad is that your fingers will stretch across most of the rear of the device. Your thumb just needs to catch the edge on this smaller iPad, and to that end this iPad looks ugly with these sized side bezels. They are neither small enough to look small (and nice) or large enough to look thumb-sized, as on iPad 3. Either go full size of make them a little smaller than they are here. Not a lot, just a little, for more visual appeal.

 

Here's the correct size:

 

(this looks far more 'correct')

 

 

The black image above implies "try to fit your thumb here, it might fit". But smaller wouldn't imply trying that, which would be intelligent design given the size and weight of iPad mini and the average size and strength of an individual's hand.

Edited by Ireland - 10/7/12 at 8:47am

1) My appologies. I completely misread his post. I think I scanned it as they are "not wide enough." Sorry for the confusion. Addressing your other points above:
2) I say gamer and movie watcher, because a smaller tablet is going to work best in landscape orientation as everything will be larger, whether 16:9 or 4:3. This is primarily how gamers and movie watchers use the iPad. It is also how I turn the iPad to increase the text size of things without zooming. And again, this is all my opinion.
3) I have never seen anyone hold the iPhone with their thumbs on the edge in one hand. It is always held cupped in the palm of the hand with the thumb being used to navigate, except in landscape mode, which is almost always used for games and media.
4) I never said I have ever seen anything rumored to be other than 4:3. This is my personal feeling that the screen should be 16:9 to fit more into the market which I believe Apple is trying to reach, combined with Jobs earlier derision of 7" screens needing sandpaper to be shipped with it for users fingers. So why would Apple just make a mini-version of iPad if they believe it would be an inadequate user experience? They wouldn't is my guess. Since we're just looking at mockups primarily and not the actual tablet, my feeling is the mockups are potentially completely wrong. I'm looking at Apple's move to 16:9 in iPhone and iPod Touch, and think that a 7" tablet makes a much better iPod touch than it does an iPad. I also think the iPod touch is sort of redundant (especially now that there are free iPhones and most kids have cell phones these days), and Apple is running an experiment with the new mini-tablet ... If they sell more 7" tablets than new iPod touches, then the iPod touch might be EOL next year. Again my sincere apologies ... Totally misread that.

As to your point, I totally understand what you are saying. However, I'm basing my experience on handling Kindles and Nooks, which have relative iPad-sized bezels. A lot of the bezel size is of course determined by the actual weight. It's hard to say how light it will actually be compared to the iPad. But, regardless how light it is, I don't necessarily agree that the thumb will rest on the edge, needing less bezel width. Even with the significantly smaller and lighter Kindle and Nook (even the 6-inch models), I tend to sit my thumb flush with the width of the bezel. It just feels more comfortable. Also, a thicker bezel allows Apple to expand the width of the screen (in landscape) from 4:3 to 16:10, or even 16:9, assuming any part of this mockup turns out to actually be real. And this also assumes that I am right that Apple's philosophy will be that the mini-iPad will be used differently than the regular iPad, or more like an iPod Touch than an iPad. In other words, Apple tends to set out to define a specific market, so rather than just churn out a 7" version of the iPad to compete with all the android tablets (and eat crow in the process over Jobs "sandpaper" comment), they will look to re-invent the 7" market space, possibly with an eye toward replacing the iPod Touch in the process.
Edited by Mac_128 - 10/7/12 at 1:41pm

 

The whole point of this specific size 7.85" at 1024 x 768 is it hits the lowest end of the sweet-spot for how small Apple thinks icons can be on an iOS device. Basically, icons on the home screen at this size and resolution will be, for example, physically the same size as icons on an all iPhones. They'll be smaller than iPad 2 and (3), but not smaller than Apple thinks makes sense.

 

With that said, I prefer to use my iPads and iPhones in portrait, and with owning an iPad (3) I won't be purchasing an iPad mini any time soon.

 

That would be Apple expanding the height of the screen, btw, and I don't see that happening on any iPad any time soon. The iPhone is different, the iPad is like a notepad, which have always been 4:3 or thereabouts.

Yeah I don't know about that.

This article sums up my thinking in this matter ...

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/07/16/jobs_on_ipad_mini/

Again, given Apple's move to Retina displays in iOS, I would expect they would not introduce another standard resolution display, especially if the goal is direct competition with the Android tablets.

Also, iOS tends to be moving toward 16:9 orientation in the smaller form factors, and a mini-tablet feels more like something smaller.

Considering Steve's comments about needing sandpaper with smaller tablets and not competing in the low-end market just to compete for profit, I can't imagine that the 7" mini-tablet will be a scaled down version of the iPad, with home screen icons the same size as those on the iPhones. It just goes against everything that's been said about Apple's philosophy about iPad.

So I reiterate my belief that if Apple really does have a 7" mini-iPad in the works, it will re-invent the 7" tablet space, not directly compete with it. That said, I doubt Apple would allow certain Apps like iPhoto to be used on it, and instead make it even a more of a consumer oriented device than even the iPad, focusing on being the perfect portable gaming device, and everything the iPod Touch does (to eventually replace it), and just happens to do iBooks, and some other apps. And it will probably be perfect for something i havent even yet imagined, nor has Google. Otherwise, to do it your way, Cook & Co. would be doing what the Register article suggests: going against Apple's earlier philosophy, or making a liar out of Steve.

Steve changed his mind, and was also assuaged further by the fact that the market for 7" tablets was bigger than he origially thought, and the fact that icons on this size of a tablet (which is 8") will be no smaller than on their current best selling device.


If anyone can sell a non-retina Apple tablet at a cheap-sounding price to a mega-large audience globally, it's Apple. Expect non-retina too, because Apple has to get the price down as low as possible, within reason, and they won't want to canabilize the larger iPad.

When did Steve change his mind? I've read absolutely nothing to that effect. The only thing we do know is that he said the current lot of 7" tablets would fail (and they did) and that the 9.7" iPad was a much a better position for Apple to start than a smaller tablet. He never said that no 7" tablet would sell. No 7.85" tablet would sell. He never said that Apple shouldn't have made a 9.7" tablet first. This warping of Jobs very simple and clear words is like Jobs suggesting that the iPod Mini would never sell simply because they started with a larger iPod. It's best to establish your product category first and then expand into it, not simply push as many sizes and types as possible to see what sticks. There are plenty of failing CE companies that still do that.