That's all good and well, smaller, lighter, cheaper, holdable... but what about actually usable? What will the users be using it for? This size doesn't lend itself to any user friendly browsing experience, it's not required for ipod functionality as a smaller size does what it needs to do, it doesn't lend itself well to magazine reading, it's smaller screen might allow for ebook reading but one would be better off with a much cheaper and more conducive to reading e-ink device, etc. etc.
So yes of course to all the advantages you mentioned, but these advantages are of no consequence when the actual device form factor doesn't lend itself to anything well at all that the iphone/ipods and the current ipad form factor do not do better and/or with more portability. Why would you need a pocketable 7" to check email and for an occasional googling, when you have a perfectly pocketable ipod/iphone? Why would you need it for an ipod?
And how much weight/size/etc. would you actually save with a couple or so inches off the diagonal? Negligible. It won't be considerably lighter for the screen compromise, it won't fit more bags than the ipad already does. It won't do anything that much better or with more functionality that would warrant a different model. A 7" would be the mini tower of tablets. Offering some questionable functionality that a small part of users might think is welcome, while apple and the rest of the buying public understand that it really isn't.
A 7" is an advantageous format only for apple competitors, and that mostly for price, it's a cheat and a compromise since they can't match the price/built quality/apps/ecosystem. Apple doesn't need to do that. Apple knows that 7" is the wrong number for now and with this technology. Apple doesn't diversify products for no good reason. They diversify them only for a compelling reason. The air had compelling reasons to exist, so did the mac mini, as well as the ipod mini/nano and the shuffle. All the other in between models didn't so they never materialized.
The lightest and most portable iPad is the one you leave on the shelf.
you obviously don't understand. Now with the iOS in both the iPad and iPod Touch, they are the EXACT SAME device, except for screen size.
Surely your post is missing a sarc mark. You think these are the EXACT SAME? If it was "the EXACT SAME except for the screen size” then all the UI element would simply be enlarged, like it is when you put an iPhone/Touch app on the iPad and hit the 2x button.
Surely your post is missing a sarc mark. You think these are the EXACT SAME? If it was "the EXACT SAME except for the screen size? then all the UI element would simply be enlarged, like it is when you put an iPhone/Touch app on the iPad and hit the 2x button.
Dude, that's a pretty lame argument...do all the UI enhancements change your over-all experience of each device, perhaps (i'd say no)...but is it enough to call them completely different devices? Absolutely NO. They are the same device.
That screen shot you posted demonstrates exactly why I hate the safari browser on the iPad. They moved all the hot buttons that were at the bottom of the screen (in easy reach of your thumbs) and placed them at the top, where your hands never rest. IMO they should re-design the UI of Safari so that all the controls are at the bottom of the screen. It's very distracting to take your hand off the iPad and touch the top of the screen every time you want to access a bookmark, or go back/forward a page, etc.
Dude, that's a pretty lame argument...do all the UI enhancements change your over-all experience of each device, perhaps (i'd say no)...but is it enough to call them completely different devices? Absolutely NO. They are the same device.
That screen shot you posted demonstrates exactly why I hate the safari browser on the iPad. They moved all the hot buttons that were at the bottom of the screen (in easy reach of your thumbs) and placed them at the top, where your hands never rest. IMO they should re-design the UI of Safari so that all the controls are at the bottom of the screen. It's very distracting to take your hand off the iPad and touch the top of the screen every time you want to access a bookmark, or go back/forward a page, etc.
1) You said it was the EXACT SAME. The capitalization for emphasis was yours.
2) Yes, the UI is how the user interfaces with the device. The underlying OS is inconsequential at that point until you want to qualify your statement to exclude the UI, but even then it?s not the EXACT SAME.
3) Are you going to say an TV with iOS for the OS foundation is the EXACT SAME as the iPhone as the iPad when it will use BackRow or an evolution of backRow for the UI. Would you say the current TV is the EXACT SAME as Mac OS X Tiger despite one using Aqua and the other using BackRow? I surely wouldn?t.
4) The differences in Safari you don?t like show that you understand that the OSes aren?t the EXACT SAME, so why state that they are?
5) I don?t care for Safari on the iPad, either. It?s the reason I returned mine, but it goes beyond the button placement. It includes the slow windowing of open pages without an option for tabs and the 25.2 kiobits of pages caching that means I can?t type up forum comments on the iPad and switch windows or apps for a second without the real risk of the page reloading, this losing all my data. The other iOS devices is virtually unlimited.
6) Again, saying it?s the EXACT SAME is silly when even at the surface the UI has been radically altered to fit the display size and dimensions. Regardless of whether you or I like what they did with iOS for the iPad it?s been re-imagined for to fit the device. They did not simply smear iOS for the iPod Touch into the iPad then call it a day.
Now you're just arguing for the sake of doing so...you just want to see yourself talk. Most of what you're saying here is semantics.
No, the Apple TV is not the exact same as the iPad or the touch, no touch screen and not portable, which would indicate a drastic difference in the user experience and interface.
Do both the touch and the iPad use iOS? Yes.
Do they both have a touch screen? Yes.
Are they both portable devices? Yes.
Do they both have the same features in the UI, 90%-99% They may look difference but they both accomplish the same tasks. Looks and actual Function are two different things.
There have been a score of people posting how this rumored 7" device is basically a bigger iPod touch, so I'm not the only one who thinks they are the same device. Say what you want, you're not going to convince anyone that what you're saying is any more right or wrong than what i'm saying.
Yes, tabs would be a great idea, or better yet why not open up the iOS to Google Chrome, FF and Opera (like the Bing App) without opening it in a safari window first.
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism
1) You said it was the EXACT SAME. The capitalization for emphasis was yours.
2) Yes, the UI is how the user interfaces with the device. The underlying OS is inconsequential at that point until you want to qualify your statement to exclude the UI, but even then it?s not the EXACT SAME.
3) Are you going to say an TV with iOS for the OS foundation is the EXACT SAME as the iPhone as the iPad when it will use BackRow or an evolution of backRow for the UI. Would you say the current TV is the EXACT SAME as Mac OS X Tiger despite one using Aqua and the other using BackRow? I surely wouldn?t.
4) The differences in Safari you don?t like show that you understand that the OSes aren?t the EXACT SAME, so why state that they are?
5) I don?t care for Safari on the iPad, either. It?s the reason I returned mine, but it goes beyond the button placement. It includes the slow windowing of open pages without an option for tabs and the 25.2 kiobits of pages caching that means I can?t type up forum comments on the iPad and switch windows or apps for a second without the real risk of the page reloading, this losing all my data. The other iOS devices is virtually unlimited.
6) Again, saying it?s the EXACT SAME is silly when even at the surface the UI has been radically altered to fit the display size and dimensions. Regardless of whether you or I like what they did with iOS for the iPad it?s been re-imagined for to fit the device. They did not simply smear iOS for the iPod Touch into the iPad then call it a day.
Now you're just arguing for the sake of doing so...you just want to see yourself talk. Most of what you're saying here is semantics.
No, the Apple TV is not the exact same as the iPad or the touch, no touch screen and not portable, which would indicate a drastic difference in the user experience and interface.
Do both the touch and the iPad use iOS? Yes.
Do they both have a touch screen? Yes.
Are they both portable devices? Yes.
Do they both have the same features in the UI, 90%-99% They may look difference but they both accomplish the same tasks. Looks and actual Function are two different things.
There have been a score of people posting how this rumored 7" device is basically a bigger iPod touch, so I'm not the only one who thinks they are the same device. Say what you want, you're not going to convince anyone that what you're saying is any more right or wrong than what i'm saying.
Yes, tabs would be a great idea, or better yet why not open up the iOS to Google Chrome, FF and Opera (like the Bing App) without opening it in a safari window first.
I don?t expect everyone to be logical or rational, but I do expect people to use words with definite meanings to stand between their claims to qualify them appropriately. You?ve clearly stated that the iPod Touch and iPad are the EXACT SAME and I?ve clearly shown you that they are far from being the EXACT SAME. Apple spent a great deal of time optimizing the UI for the device. You don?t have to believe this, but you?d be a fool not to.
You also don?t have to believe that a 7? iPad wouldn?t just expand the UI elements by 4x from a 3/5? display, but again, you?d be a fool to think Apple will simply smear an OS and UI designed for a smaller device into a larger one and call it a day.
Hell, they even created a new font for the iPhone 4 specifically to take advantage of the double resolution. Ask yourself, if they are so conscientious of the UI that they would create a font to showcase for a higher pixel device with the same size display, why do you think they wouldn?t idealize the UI for an iOS device with a larger display?
Ridiculousness...with this kind of BS rationale, one could argue that my iPhone 3GS is not EXACTLY the same as your iPhone 3GS just because i have different apps for mine than yours. Total semantics and a pointless argument. You'd be a fool to think anyone really gives a crap about what you call minor differences when making the comparison. When it all boils down to it, they are the same devices. I would even go as far to say that the iPhone is the same device as the Touch, minus the phone and 3G coverage.
Ok, so let's say the make a 7" iPad, if they put the iOS 3.2 on it, it would be exactly the same as the iPad, with a smaller screen, and the same as the Touch, which a bigger screen, and "minor" tweaks to the UI, that make it not better or worse than the Touch. In my mind (and many others beside you) that makes it the same.
Let's recap:
are all these devices a portable wireless device? Yes
do they all have touch UI? Yes
do they all have a touch screen? yes
are they all tablet-style devices? yes
Is the iOS the same for all the devices? Yes, if you look at the functionality of each application and how they work, yes...they may work slightly different, but the outcome is the same.
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism
I don’t expect everyone to be logical or rational, but I do expect people to use words with definite meanings to stand between their claims to qualify them appropriately. You’ve clearly stated that the iPod Touch and iPad are the EXACT SAME and I’ve clearly shown you that they are far from being the EXACT SAME. Apple spent a great deal of time optimizing the UI for the device. You don’t have to believe this, but you’d be a fool not to.
You also don’t have to believe that a 7” iPad wouldn’t just expand the UI elements by 4x from a 3/5” display, but again, you’d be a fool to think Apple will simply smear an OS and UI designed for a smaller device into a larger one and call it a day.
Hell, they even created a new font for the iPhone 4 specifically to take advantage of the double resolution. Ask yourself, if they are so conscientious of the UI that they would create a font to showcase for a higher pixel device with the same size display, why do you think they wouldn’t idealize the UI for an iOS device with a larger display?
Ok, so let's say the make a 7" iPad, if they put the iOS 3.2 on it, it would be exactly the same as the iPad, with a smaller screen, and the same as the Touch, which a bigger screen, and "minor" tweaks to the UI, that make it not better or worse than the Touch. In my mind (and many others beside you) that makes it the same.
So bow you are conceding that they aren't the exct same. Nice!
Just like all the people who said I wa wrong for thinking that widescreen displays are not great for less than 12" displays and that Mac OS X would make for a horrible tablet OS (as witnessed by Windows on tablets and later Axiotron's Modbook, you will
Also be proven wrong that Apple will simply pop in the iPod Touch's iOS into a device with 4x the screen real estate without any consideration or changes to the UI, I they ever release a 7" iPad. It's unbelievably silly to still keep defending your positing that they would.
Do you not recall the separate SDKs for the iPad and iPhone/Touch when it was first released? Can you not see the overlays and additional menu items built into the iPad that are nor on the iPhone and Touch's iOS design for it's UI?
Quote:
Let's recap:
are all these devices a portable wireless device?
do they all have touch UI?
do they all have a touch screen?
are they all tablet-style devices?
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
Quote:
Is the iOS the same for all the devices? Yes, if you look at the functionality of each application and how they work, yes...they may work slightly different, but the outcome is the same.
Don't be obtuse, of course not.
PS: Why do some forum posters insist on posting ABOVE the quoted text when the forum clearly reads DOWN? This isn't an email conversation.
Seems to me that the thing to do is come up with the largest device that still has the dimensions to fit in an adult's pockets.
In terms of the ideal screen size for many of the uses the touchscreen products are intended for, the iPad is ideal. So I don't believe there is any doubt that the more you drop down from that size, the poorer the user experience. But the point to a smaller device is that you can slip it into your pocket. Take that away and all you end up with is a less enjoyable variation on the current iPad form factor.
If there is a meaningful upgrade in portability one would be willing to live with the price paid for having a smaller screen. On the other hand, if the device is too large to pocket, and a 7" iPad would be, there isn't much practical gain from opting for that device instead of the full-sized iPad. Sure it would be lighter but it would not be nearly as immersive an experience. The problem is that many would expect it to be.
I think it would be like the dissatisfaction experienced with netbooks. Being a computer with most of the bits and pieces you'd expect to find on a laptop, many expect full-size laptop performance and wind up disappointed. On the other hand, something small enough to fit into one's pocket would not be expected by anyone to replace using a larger touchscreen device like the iPad. It would be understood that we're talking an entirely different class of equipment. A 7" iPad would tend to not be so well defined.
I have to say that if the competition's response to the 9.7" iPad is a large collection of 7" devices, the iPad will blow them all out of the water. The reason is that if you're engaging in an activity like browsing, that extra screen real estate impacts on a very tangible level the character of the user experience.
That said, there is a place for a device that offers a huge improvement in portability yet is still enjoyable to use, though unfortunately less so. Such a device could be used in a lot of situations where the iPad wouldn't fit in. And it would serve as a good response to your typical e-reader. If that device was less immersive, I think the average consumer would understand instantly that such would be the case.
I could easily imagine people owning both, namely the iPad and, for lack of a better name, the Touch Maxi or Jumbo Touch. The idea being to use them in different settings. A 7" iPad, on the other hand, would tend to cannibalize sales at both ends.
This post answers the question as to why you have an "obtuse" amount of posts on this forum.
you're one slick cat when it comes to posting. you're always making every conversation out as if you were the originator of the idea, way to go. Thanks for entering my ignore list.
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism
So bow you are conceding that they aren't the exct same. Nice!
Just like all the people who said I wa wrong for thinking that widescreen displays are not great for less than 12" displays and that Mac OS X would make for a horrible tablet OS (as witnessed by Windows on tablets and later Axiotron's Modbook, you will
Also be proven wrong that Apple will simply pop in the iPod Touch's iOS into a device with 4x the screen real estate without any consideration or changes to the UI, I they ever release a 7" iPad. It's unbelievably silly to still keep defending your positing that they would.
Do you not recall the separate SDKs for the iPad and iPhone/Touch when it was first released? Can you not see the overlays and additional menu items built into the iPad that are nor on the iPhone and Touch's iOS design for it's UI?
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
Don't be obtuse, of course not.
PS: Why do some forum posters insist on posting ABOVE the quoted text when the forum clearly reads DOWN? This isn't an email conversation.
Comments
That's all good and well, smaller, lighter, cheaper, holdable... but what about actually usable? What will the users be using it for? This size doesn't lend itself to any user friendly browsing experience, it's not required for ipod functionality as a smaller size does what it needs to do, it doesn't lend itself well to magazine reading, it's smaller screen might allow for ebook reading but one would be better off with a much cheaper and more conducive to reading e-ink device, etc. etc.
So yes of course to all the advantages you mentioned, but these advantages are of no consequence when the actual device form factor doesn't lend itself to anything well at all that the iphone/ipods and the current ipad form factor do not do better and/or with more portability. Why would you need a pocketable 7" to check email and for an occasional googling, when you have a perfectly pocketable ipod/iphone? Why would you need it for an ipod?
And how much weight/size/etc. would you actually save with a couple or so inches off the diagonal? Negligible. It won't be considerably lighter for the screen compromise, it won't fit more bags than the ipad already does. It won't do anything that much better or with more functionality that would warrant a different model. A 7" would be the mini tower of tablets. Offering some questionable functionality that a small part of users might think is welcome, while apple and the rest of the buying public understand that it really isn't.
A 7" is an advantageous format only for apple competitors, and that mostly for price, it's a cheat and a compromise since they can't match the price/built quality/apps/ecosystem. Apple doesn't need to do that. Apple knows that 7" is the wrong number for now and with this technology. Apple doesn't diversify products for no good reason. They diversify them only for a compelling reason. The air had compelling reasons to exist, so did the mac mini, as well as the ipod mini/nano and the shuffle. All the other in between models didn't so they never materialized.
The lightest and most portable iPad is the one you leave on the shelf.
More likely to see slightly larger iPod Touch than smaller iPad.
you obviously don't understand. Now with the iOS in both the iPad and iPod Touch, they are the EXACT SAME device, except for screen size.
you obviously don't understand. Now with the iOS in both the iPad and iPod Touch, they are the EXACT SAME device, except for screen size.
Surely your post is missing a sarc mark. You think these are the EXACT SAME? If it was "the EXACT SAME except for the screen size” then all the UI element would simply be enlarged, like it is when you put an iPhone/Touch app on the iPad and hit the 2x button.
Surely your post is missing a sarc mark. You think these are the EXACT SAME? If it was "the EXACT SAME except for the screen size? then all the UI element would simply be enlarged, like it is when you put an iPhone/Touch app on the iPad and hit the 2x button.
Dude, that's a pretty lame argument...do all the UI enhancements change your over-all experience of each device, perhaps (i'd say no)...but is it enough to call them completely different devices? Absolutely NO. They are the same device.
That screen shot you posted demonstrates exactly why I hate the safari browser on the iPad. They moved all the hot buttons that were at the bottom of the screen (in easy reach of your thumbs) and placed them at the top, where your hands never rest. IMO they should re-design the UI of Safari so that all the controls are at the bottom of the screen. It's very distracting to take your hand off the iPad and touch the top of the screen every time you want to access a bookmark, or go back/forward a page, etc.
Dude, that's a pretty lame argument...do all the UI enhancements change your over-all experience of each device, perhaps (i'd say no)...but is it enough to call them completely different devices? Absolutely NO. They are the same device.
That screen shot you posted demonstrates exactly why I hate the safari browser on the iPad. They moved all the hot buttons that were at the bottom of the screen (in easy reach of your thumbs) and placed them at the top, where your hands never rest. IMO they should re-design the UI of Safari so that all the controls are at the bottom of the screen. It's very distracting to take your hand off the iPad and touch the top of the screen every time you want to access a bookmark, or go back/forward a page, etc.
1) You said it was the EXACT SAME. The capitalization for emphasis was yours.
2) Yes, the UI is how the user interfaces with the device. The underlying OS is inconsequential at that point until you want to qualify your statement to exclude the UI, but even then it?s not the EXACT SAME.
3) Are you going to say an TV with iOS for the OS foundation is the EXACT SAME as the iPhone as the iPad when it will use BackRow or an evolution of backRow for the UI. Would you say the current TV is the EXACT SAME as Mac OS X Tiger despite one using Aqua and the other using BackRow? I surely wouldn?t.
4) The differences in Safari you don?t like show that you understand that the OSes aren?t the EXACT SAME, so why state that they are?
5) I don?t care for Safari on the iPad, either. It?s the reason I returned mine, but it goes beyond the button placement. It includes the slow windowing of open pages without an option for tabs and the 25.2 kiobits of pages caching that means I can?t type up forum comments on the iPad and switch windows or apps for a second without the real risk of the page reloading, this losing all my data. The other iOS devices is virtually unlimited.
6) Again, saying it?s the EXACT SAME is silly when even at the surface the UI has been radically altered to fit the display size and dimensions. Regardless of whether you or I like what they did with iOS for the iPad it?s been re-imagined for to fit the device. They did not simply smear iOS for the iPod Touch into the iPad then call it a day.
No, the Apple TV is not the exact same as the iPad or the touch, no touch screen and not portable, which would indicate a drastic difference in the user experience and interface.
Do both the touch and the iPad use iOS? Yes.
Do they both have a touch screen? Yes.
Are they both portable devices? Yes.
Do they both have the same features in the UI, 90%-99% They may look difference but they both accomplish the same tasks. Looks and actual Function are two different things.
There have been a score of people posting how this rumored 7" device is basically a bigger iPod touch, so I'm not the only one who thinks they are the same device. Say what you want, you're not going to convince anyone that what you're saying is any more right or wrong than what i'm saying.
Yes, tabs would be a great idea, or better yet why not open up the iOS to Google Chrome, FF and Opera (like the Bing App) without opening it in a safari window first.
1) You said it was the EXACT SAME. The capitalization for emphasis was yours.
2) Yes, the UI is how the user interfaces with the device. The underlying OS is inconsequential at that point until you want to qualify your statement to exclude the UI, but even then it?s not the EXACT SAME.
3) Are you going to say an TV with iOS for the OS foundation is the EXACT SAME as the iPhone as the iPad when it will use BackRow or an evolution of backRow for the UI. Would you say the current TV is the EXACT SAME as Mac OS X Tiger despite one using Aqua and the other using BackRow? I surely wouldn?t.
4) The differences in Safari you don?t like show that you understand that the OSes aren?t the EXACT SAME, so why state that they are?
5) I don?t care for Safari on the iPad, either. It?s the reason I returned mine, but it goes beyond the button placement. It includes the slow windowing of open pages without an option for tabs and the 25.2 kiobits of pages caching that means I can?t type up forum comments on the iPad and switch windows or apps for a second without the real risk of the page reloading, this losing all my data. The other iOS devices is virtually unlimited.
6) Again, saying it?s the EXACT SAME is silly when even at the surface the UI has been radically altered to fit the display size and dimensions. Regardless of whether you or I like what they did with iOS for the iPad it?s been re-imagined for to fit the device. They did not simply smear iOS for the iPod Touch into the iPad then call it a day.
Now you're just arguing for the sake of doing so...you just want to see yourself talk. Most of what you're saying here is semantics.
No, the Apple TV is not the exact same as the iPad or the touch, no touch screen and not portable, which would indicate a drastic difference in the user experience and interface.
Do both the touch and the iPad use iOS? Yes.
Do they both have a touch screen? Yes.
Are they both portable devices? Yes.
Do they both have the same features in the UI, 90%-99% They may look difference but they both accomplish the same tasks. Looks and actual Function are two different things.
There have been a score of people posting how this rumored 7" device is basically a bigger iPod touch, so I'm not the only one who thinks they are the same device. Say what you want, you're not going to convince anyone that what you're saying is any more right or wrong than what i'm saying.
Yes, tabs would be a great idea, or better yet why not open up the iOS to Google Chrome, FF and Opera (like the Bing App) without opening it in a safari window first.
I don?t expect everyone to be logical or rational, but I do expect people to use words with definite meanings to stand between their claims to qualify them appropriately. You?ve clearly stated that the iPod Touch and iPad are the EXACT SAME and I?ve clearly shown you that they are far from being the EXACT SAME. Apple spent a great deal of time optimizing the UI for the device. You don?t have to believe this, but you?d be a fool not to.
You also don?t have to believe that a 7? iPad wouldn?t just expand the UI elements by 4x from a 3/5? display, but again, you?d be a fool to think Apple will simply smear an OS and UI designed for a smaller device into a larger one and call it a day.
Hell, they even created a new font for the iPhone 4 specifically to take advantage of the double resolution. Ask yourself, if they are so conscientious of the UI that they would create a font to showcase for a higher pixel device with the same size display, why do you think they wouldn?t idealize the UI for an iOS device with a larger display?
Ok, so let's say the make a 7" iPad, if they put the iOS 3.2 on it, it would be exactly the same as the iPad, with a smaller screen, and the same as the Touch, which a bigger screen, and "minor" tweaks to the UI, that make it not better or worse than the Touch. In my mind (and many others beside you) that makes it the same.
Let's recap:
are all these devices a portable wireless device? Yes
do they all have touch UI? Yes
do they all have a touch screen? yes
are they all tablet-style devices? yes
Is the iOS the same for all the devices? Yes, if you look at the functionality of each application and how they work, yes...they may work slightly different, but the outcome is the same.
I don’t expect everyone to be logical or rational, but I do expect people to use words with definite meanings to stand between their claims to qualify them appropriately. You’ve clearly stated that the iPod Touch and iPad are the EXACT SAME and I’ve clearly shown you that they are far from being the EXACT SAME. Apple spent a great deal of time optimizing the UI for the device. You don’t have to believe this, but you’d be a fool not to.
You also don’t have to believe that a 7” iPad wouldn’t just expand the UI elements by 4x from a 3/5” display, but again, you’d be a fool to think Apple will simply smear an OS and UI designed for a smaller device into a larger one and call it a day.
Hell, they even created a new font for the iPhone 4 specifically to take advantage of the double resolution. Ask yourself, if they are so conscientious of the UI that they would create a font to showcase for a higher pixel device with the same size display, why do you think they wouldn’t idealize the UI for an iOS device with a larger display?
Ok, so let's say the make a 7" iPad, if they put the iOS 3.2 on it, it would be exactly the same as the iPad, with a smaller screen, and the same as the Touch, which a bigger screen, and "minor" tweaks to the UI, that make it not better or worse than the Touch. In my mind (and many others beside you) that makes it the same.
So bow you are conceding that they aren't the exct same. Nice!
Just like all the people who said I wa wrong for thinking that widescreen displays are not great for less than 12" displays and that Mac OS X would make for a horrible tablet OS (as witnessed by Windows on tablets and later Axiotron's Modbook, you will
Also be proven wrong that Apple will simply pop in the iPod Touch's iOS into a device with 4x the screen real estate without any consideration or changes to the UI, I they ever release a 7" iPad. It's unbelievably silly to still keep defending your positing that they would.
Do you not recall the separate SDKs for the iPad and iPhone/Touch when it was first released? Can you not see the overlays and additional menu items built into the iPad that are nor on the iPhone and Touch's iOS design for it's UI?
Let's recap:
are all these devices a portable wireless device?
do they all have touch UI?
do they all have a touch screen?
are they all tablet-style devices?
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
Is the iOS the same for all the devices? Yes, if you look at the functionality of each application and how they work, yes...they may work slightly different, but the outcome is the same.
Don't be obtuse, of course not.
PS: Why do some forum posters insist on posting ABOVE the quoted text when the forum clearly reads DOWN? This isn't an email conversation.
In terms of the ideal screen size for many of the uses the touchscreen products are intended for, the iPad is ideal. So I don't believe there is any doubt that the more you drop down from that size, the poorer the user experience. But the point to a smaller device is that you can slip it into your pocket. Take that away and all you end up with is a less enjoyable variation on the current iPad form factor.
If there is a meaningful upgrade in portability one would be willing to live with the price paid for having a smaller screen. On the other hand, if the device is too large to pocket, and a 7" iPad would be, there isn't much practical gain from opting for that device instead of the full-sized iPad. Sure it would be lighter but it would not be nearly as immersive an experience. The problem is that many would expect it to be.
I think it would be like the dissatisfaction experienced with netbooks. Being a computer with most of the bits and pieces you'd expect to find on a laptop, many expect full-size laptop performance and wind up disappointed. On the other hand, something small enough to fit into one's pocket would not be expected by anyone to replace using a larger touchscreen device like the iPad. It would be understood that we're talking an entirely different class of equipment. A 7" iPad would tend to not be so well defined.
I have to say that if the competition's response to the 9.7" iPad is a large collection of 7" devices, the iPad will blow them all out of the water. The reason is that if you're engaging in an activity like browsing, that extra screen real estate impacts on a very tangible level the character of the user experience.
That said, there is a place for a device that offers a huge improvement in portability yet is still enjoyable to use, though unfortunately less so. Such a device could be used in a lot of situations where the iPad wouldn't fit in. And it would serve as a good response to your typical e-reader. If that device was less immersive, I think the average consumer would understand instantly that such would be the case.
I could easily imagine people owning both, namely the iPad and, for lack of a better name, the Touch Maxi or Jumbo Touch. The idea being to use them in different settings. A 7" iPad, on the other hand, would tend to cannibalize sales at both ends.
you're one slick cat when it comes to posting. you're always making every conversation out as if you were the originator of the idea, way to go. Thanks for entering my ignore list.
So bow you are conceding that they aren't the exct same. Nice!
Just like all the people who said I wa wrong for thinking that widescreen displays are not great for less than 12" displays and that Mac OS X would make for a horrible tablet OS (as witnessed by Windows on tablets and later Axiotron's Modbook, you will
Also be proven wrong that Apple will simply pop in the iPod Touch's iOS into a device with 4x the screen real estate without any consideration or changes to the UI, I they ever release a 7" iPad. It's unbelievably silly to still keep defending your positing that they would.
Do you not recall the separate SDKs for the iPad and iPhone/Touch when it was first released? Can you not see the overlays and additional menu items built into the iPad that are nor on the iPhone and Touch's iOS design for it's UI?
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
Don't be obtuse, of course not.
PS: Why do some forum posters insist on posting ABOVE the quoted text when the forum clearly reads DOWN? This isn't an email conversation.