At this point with the iTunes ecosystem so entrenched, Apple could put a 30 pin dock connector on a bag of pretzels and there would be queue around the block.
Yeah... but they shoulda' made a chocolate covered pretzel with a slot for peanut butter
In fact it is a question I struggle with often as I await iPad 2. That is will I use it enough considering my heavy use of iPhone which is with me 24/7. Carrying an iPhone everywhere I go is easy relative to an iPad. An iPad though requires a lot of thought in the same manner as a laptop.
Quote:
Originally Posted by island hermit
I slept on that question and I arrived at the same thing that I said to DaHarder... why would you take two devices (phone plus Galaxy Tab) when you could just take the iPhone and leave the tab at home (the Tab can only be used as a phone if you use Skype). I couldn't see any advantage in also having the Tab with me.
The use case is the same as an iPad in an easier to carry package.
Quote:
The GT seemed too big (to me) to be any more convenient than the iPad.
That is highly debatable but probably isn't worth a discussion because everyones needs are different. I will only say that in many cases a smaller device will be prefered.
Quote:
It won't fit into a pocket easily and might as well be left at home. If it is to be left at home then I would much rather have the screen real estate that my iPad offers.
You see this is where you fall down, because you imple that somthing that doesn't fit into a pocket isn't worth taking along. It is really just the opposite in my mind, the more manageable size means that it is easier to take along. The only issue being the devices ability to deliver your required apps effectively in the field. Some apps require a big screen but most do not.
Quote:
Other than Flash I didn't see anything that the GT offered over the iPad.
Just my observations.
Well size for one. If you have been brain washed into believing that bigger is always beter than this can be hard to swallow. But it is a reality.
TABs biggest short coming is Android more than anything. It is not however short on other useful features. Somebody else has already covered the OS issue but to paraphrase there's nothing ready in the short term for alternative tablets. I like RIMs use of QNX but they are a long way from having a viable tablet SDK, android just doesn't do it for me so at the moment Apple is the only player. More than anything else it is the issue of OS'es suitable for the devices that is inhibiting competition.
Would you say that the competition is moving pretty slowly compared to the general rate of technology these days? The ipad has outpaced the competition to the point that:
*the nearest competitor, android, still doesn't have an os that they feel is right for a tablet device, even as hardware manufacturers are trying to push into the market
*Other competitors like rim and hp/palm also don't even have an os ready for a tablet device.
*the iPad seems to be succeedIng to the point where they can manage better pricing through more volume. Entry devices are looking to compete by going smaller.
I know you were asking someone else, but I think this is an easy one.
The rest of the world seems to be moving slowly because they are starting from so far behind. Before the iPad was released everyone thought tablets had to run a full os (you know, with printer drivers and running Microsoft Office and such).
Of course, that is how the industry had been trying to make tablets for years, but no one seemed to see that there was another way until they saw how sleek and fast and fun the iPad was. Long battery life, the App eco system and lightning responsiveness didn't just happen with the iPad, Apple had been working on the tablet for years and laying the groundwork while everyone else was waiting for Windows 7!
I think it is a credit to Google that Android even close to becoming credible competition. You can see why Jobs was so angry when Google entered this arena. Of course Google had a member on Apple's board for years, so it is fair to wonder what Android would look like if they had to do it all on their own...
You see this is where you fall down, because you imple that somthing that doesn't fit into a pocket isn't worth taking along. It is really just the opposite in my mind, the more manageable size means that it is easier to take along. The only issue being the devices ability to deliver your required apps effectively in the field. Some apps require a big screen but most do not.
Well size for one. If you have been brain washed into believing that bigger is always beter than this can be hard to swallow. But it is a reality.
I imply that something that doesn't fit into a pocket isn't worth taking along?!
HUH?
I implied that if I'm going to take something along that doesn't easily fit into my pocket then it doesn't matter whether I take the GT or the iPad because I'm going to have to stick the damn thing into something less convenient than a pocket... in that case I'll take the iPad... and it has nothing to do with being brainwashed into believing that bigger is always better. Bigger is better if the next best choice is something smaller, almost as expensive and no less convenient to carry around and has less functionality (imo)... especially if you already have an iPhone that is a much better choice for a convenient package that does everything including being able to be used as a phone.
I read all the posts here today and i think apple will bring out a 8x5 7x5 ipad or touch IOS device in 3 yrs .
7x5 is lab coat sized and can be used by the medical people in the tens of millions of units world wide.
go to an apple store grab a touch and a ipad . Put side by side and there seems to be a form factor missing .
9
I think if you do a web search for "iPad Lab Coat", you will find that there are quite a few lab coats with pockets that can hold the iPad -- so that has become less of an issue.
When I am carrying a lot of gear (Cameras, tripod, iPhone, iPad, Folding chair) I carry the iPad in a holster with a shoulder strap. My camera bag (containing 2 cameras, batteries, SD cards andmy iPhone) also attaches to the iPad Holster strap -- freeing both hands for the tripod and chair.
Well obviously I just did! Aspect ratio is very important if one of your primary use cases is the delivery of video and movies. Obviously there is no perfect aspect ratio, but the point is wider would have been smarter on the iPad.
If it were mostly for looking at movies. Since it's not, widescreen would have compromised many other applications in favor of one.
Quote:
Actually a wider aspect ratio is good for a number of things including viewing of pics, reading a column of text, certain types of games, apps that leverage a wide screen (IDEs) and others. There is really very little to defend with respect to the 4:3 ratio.
Wow. Did you get a certain sinking feeling while you were typing that? Because it must have occurred to you, as it would to anyone reading that list, that you're just strenuously pretending.
Pictures are not better on a wide screen, you have to shrink or crop to fit them in. A column of text is typically part of multiple columns and or images on a full page layout, which is better on the iPad. "Certain games"? Care to name one? "Apps that leverage widescreen"? Care to name one? And yes, I suppose an app specifically written to an aspect ratio is going to fare better on that aspect ratio than another, how is that a selling point?
Quote:
Don't be dense you would actually be increasing usability especially as the screen becomes smaller. For example grab an iPhone and type in text into this very dialog box. You get constant scrolling in horizontal orientation. The easiest way to improve iPhone, without blowing it up size wise is to give it a wider screen.
The same physical realities are at work when you are dealing with sub seven inch displays. You need one orientation that is much wider than the other to realize effective UI elements like keyboards.
You're making the case for rendering a 7" screen somewhat more usable, not for why the iPad needs to be widescreen. I don't think anyone is arguing that HTC should make a 4:3 7" tablet.
Quote:
Yep and everyone of those text delivery formats works better on a taller screen. Especially on a small device. Think about newspapers and their centuries of experience with columns of text. Papers are arrainged the way they are because it enhances readability as would a wide screen display offer up text in vertical mode. The science here is very clear. Just because Apple effectively markets it's choice of aspect ratios doesn't mean that that ratio is a good solution from the human factors perspective.
Yikes, again with the crazy talk. If widescreen layouts are so desirable, why don't newspapers come in long tall strips?
The fact is that books, magazines, newspapers, flyers, brochures, pamphlets and, critically, web pages all tend closer to 4:3 than widescreen, because narrow columns feel constrained. Yes, text may be laid out in columns as an element on a page. The iPad lets me look at the whole page. You're trying to argue that there's something wonderful in being forced to only look at the constituent elements, one at a time. As I say, crazy talk.
Quote:
Again I have to question if you really know what you are talking about. Have you looked at a 35mm negative? The closest format to paper size is or was the 6x7 cm format, other formats are far from 4:3 and some where square. Pics are often printed on common paper sizes but even those vary a bit in aspect ratios
OK, so which common film format is closer to 16:9, again?
Quote:
Exactly! How would you type up notes on a sub seven in device without it being wide screen? The keyboard would still be a compromise but would be significantly wider, in horizontal mode, than a keyboard on a 4:3 ratio device.
Again, an argument for how to make a 7" screen have some utility, not for why the iPad needs to go widescreen.
Quote:
Like a steno pad? If you want something bigger then you have more options, but as devices get smaller usability goes out the window with 4:3 aspect ratios. Besides ask yourself this; in a notebook what is the aspect ratio of the working surface?
And again. Also, 8.5x11, which is what I consider the working surface of a notebook, is far closer to 4:3 than 16:9, so I'm not sure what your point is.
Quote:
Or turn it vertically and user reader mode to read the text like you would in a newspaper. I'm not sure why you are struggling so much here, it is pretty simple really.
Surprisingly, I don't carry a little vertical mask so as to read newspapers a column at a time with no awareness of anything surrounding.
Quote:
Nope not at all, what we are looking at is the human factors issues that have been with us for thousands of years now when it comes to reading text. Plus the smarter media delivery that comes with a wide screen.
Good lord. It's like talking to someone from an alternate world. Where are all these long and tall text delivery systems? Why isn't the standard paper size something like 12X7 instead of 11 x 8.5?
Quote:
You mis a couple of important points. First there are billions of people on the planet. Second there are millions of those that buy whatever Apple feeds them. Some even bought AppleTVs. Beyound that we really don't know what Apple tested or what they intend to deliver on other devices. Apple could deliver a wide screen device and simply call it a video iPod.
Ah, the old "it's only popular because of Apple's mysterious powers of hypnosis" canard. No need to pay any mind to the available evidence, it's all smoke and mirrors.
Quote:
As for developers and apps, they have been fitting apps to the available tech since the start of the computer age. In a very literal sense you work with what you have be that a TTY, an 80x20 text display or an OpenGL driven display. In this case developers see a platform that they can make lots of money on so they optimize for the device, which should surprise no one.
Which is why Samsung should make an 6 x 14 tablet. It will give us even more of that wonderful column goodness, and app developers will simply adapt.
I think if you do a web search for "iPad Lab Coat", you will find that there are quite a few lab coats with pockets that can hold the iPad -- so that has become less of an issue.
When I am carrying a lot of gear (Cameras, tripod, iPhone, iPad, Folding chair) I carry the iPad in a holster with a shoulder strap. My camera bag (containing 2 cameras, batteries, SD cards andmy iPhone) also attaches to the iPad Holster strap -- freeing both hands for the tripod and chair.
agreed
i only feel for sales to hit tens of millions world wide it needs to be a tad smaller .
i predict that we have only touched base on the incredible uses that ios devices hold .
If it were mostly for looking at movies. Since it's not, widescreen would have compromised many other applications in favor of one.
Wow. Did you get a certain sinking feeling while you were typing that? Because it must have occurred to you, as it would to anyone reading that list, that you're just strenuously pretending.
Pictures are not better on a wide screen, you have to shrink or crop to fit them in. A column of text is typically part of multiple columns and or images on a full page layout, which is better on the iPad. "Certain games"? Care to name one? "Apps that leverage widescreen"? Care to name one? And yes, I suppose an app specifically written to an aspect ratio is going to fare better on that aspect ratio than another, how is that a selling point?
You're making the case for rendering a 7" screen somewhat more usable, not for why the iPad needs to be widescreen. I don't think anyone is arguing that HTC should make a 4:3 7" tablet.
Yikes, again with the crazy talk. If widescreen layouts are so desirable, why don't newspapers come in long tall strips?
The fact is that books, magazines, newspapers, flyers, brochures, pamphlets and, critically, web pages all tend closer to 4:3 than widescreen, because narrow columns feel constrained. Yes, text may be laid out in columns as an element on a page. The iPad lets me look at the whole page. You're trying to argue that there's something wonderful in being forced to only look at the constituent elements, one at a time. As I say, crazy talk.
OK, so which common film format is closer to 16:9, again?
Again, an argument for how to make a 7" screen have some utility, not for why the iPad needs to go widescreen.
And again. Also, 8.5x11, which is what I consider the working surface of a notebook, is far closer to 4:3 than 16:9, so I'm not sure what your point is.
Surprisingly, I don't carry a little vertical mask so as to read newspapers a column at a time with no awareness of anything surrounding.
Good lord. It's like talking to someone from an alternate world. Where are all these long and tall text delivery systems? Why isn't the standard paper size something like 12X7 instead of 11 x 8.5?
Ah, the old "it's only popular because of Apple's mysterious powers of hypnosis" canard. No need to pay any mind to the available evidence, it's all smoke and mirrors.
Which is why Samsung should make an 6 x 14 tablet. It will give us even more of that wonderful column goodness, and app developers will simply adapt.
The thing is that tablet PCs aren't as functional as desktop PCs. Sure, I'd like an iPad, but there's no possible way I'd substitute it over a laptop. Right now tablet PCs are fun to play with, but there's not much real work you can achieve with them. You can do simple word process, watch movies, and play games, but they're nothing near what a real PC can do. Try typing with a physical keyboard, then type with the keyboard on an iPad and watch how much your WPM drops. The thing is that smaller, touchscreen devices simply can't do as much as a manual device. I'm not taking away from the iPad, but the people who are expecting tablet PCs to do everything a desktop PC can do will be disappointed (e.g. the 11 million people who bought the iPad over a computer). (Kudos to Apple for selling millions of these things, by the way.)
The thing is that tablet PCs aren't as functional as desktop PCs. Sure, I'd like an iPad, but there's no possible way I'd substitute it over a laptop. Right now tablet PCs are fun to play with, but there's not much real work you can achieve with them. You can do simple word process, watch movies, and play games, but they're nothing near what a real PC can do. Try typing with a physical keyboard, then type with the keyboard on an iPad and watch how much your WPM drops. The thing is that smaller, touchscreen devices simply can't do as much as a manual device. I'm not taking away from the iPad, but the people who are expecting tablet PCs to do everything a desktop PC can do will be disappointed (e.g. the 11 million people who bought the iPad over a computer). (Kudos to Apple for selling millions of these things, by the way.)
give apple 4 gen of ipads and you'll see your whole point deflated
Of course you did, don't be dense. Previously, you said, "there is a thought in the industry." Where, who?
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69
Aspect ratio is very important if one of your primary use cases is the delivery of video and movies. Obviously there is no perfect aspect ratio, but the point is wider would have been smarter on the iPad.
As for this point and the rest of your points, I think you are just confusing yourself; and I am forced to conclude you don't know what you are talking about...
You began your initial post by comparing competitors' 7in tablets to the iPad. Of course, there is only one iPad at the moment. So when you state that Apple has gotten the size and aspect ratio of the iPad wrong, we have to assume you are talking about the 9.7 in, 4:3, 1024 x 768 iPad that I am typing this post on right now, and not some hypothetical 7in iPad or oversize video iPod that Apple may or may not release in the future to "remain competitive", according to your unnamed pundits.
So as you complain how the iPad is too large, I don't understand why you think it should be made "wider". Rather, it is already "taller" than the competing 7inchers (in landscape). To go smaller and wide format, would be like making the iPad 1024 x640 or so. We would lose some 120 pixels off the narrow side, which is extremely useful for most productive purposes. I would have this full keyboard up, but little space above the keyboard to see the text I am now typing. I might see as much of this webpage as i see now, but at the expense of the browser bar above. What good is that?
I think you are arguing for the sake of it, and making a poor argument at that. Portrait or landscape, my iPad is very usable. I don't want it squished down wider. At the same screen size of 9.7 in, that would make it too tall in portrait mode and less compact to carry. Reduce the screen size like the competitors have done, and as i have noted, you 1) lose productive vertical space in landscape mode, and 2) portrait mode for reading or creating becomes unnatural.
Furethermore, I don't agree that watching movies is the primary purpose. A wider format would be odd to use productively in portrait mode. It would be like reading a long receipt rather than a book.
I didn't say most photos are exactly 4:3. But they are far closer to that than they are to 16:9 movies. Photos get cropped less when displayed full screen on an iPad than on a wide format screen. I think you made my point when you mentioned other photo ratios. The closer to square you get, the worse they look on wide-format screens. You would get an awful lot more and worse vertical letter boxing, versus the simple horizontal letter boxing you see when you view a 16:9 movie on an iPad. Personally, I would rather have the letterboxed movies.
BTW, I am a free-lancer who does photography, videography and video editing, DTP, web design and presentations all on a professional basis. This 4:3 format is a lot more versatile for all these things than a wider format would be.
This tells me all I need to know about you .... as they say in Texas ..... "All hat, no cattle"
I was going to let this go, but its been bugging me...
I don't think I was claiming to have a big hat--all I said was "as a shareholder." I didn't claim to be a major player. Like many Apple fans on this site, my passion for all things Apple predates my financial interest in the company.
And certainly there has to be more to know about me than the fact that I did not invest in Apple the first few times I thought it was a good idea!
Right now tablet PCs are fun to play with, but there's not much real work you can achieve with them.
It's a matter of perspective and people choosing the right tool for the job: a surgeon won't achieve much real work in their profession with a blowtorch.
There are tasks and uses for which the iPad is perfect.
So as you complain how the iPad is too large, I don't understand why you think it should be made "wider". Rather, it is already "taller" than the competing 7inchers (in landscape). To go smaller and wide format, would be like making the iPad 1024 x640 or so. We would lose some 120 pixels off the narrow side, which is extremely useful for most productive purposes.
Portrait or landscape, my iPad is very usable. I don't want it squished down wider. At the same screen size of 9.7 in, that would make it too tall in portrait mode and less compact to carry. Reduce the screen size like the competitors have done, and as i have noted, you 1) lose productive vertical space in landscape mode, and 2) portrait mode for reading or creating becomes unnatural.
Furethermore, I don't agree that watching movies is the primary purpose. A wider format would be odd to use productively in portrait mode.
It would be like reading a long receipt rather than a book.
I didn't say most photos are exactly 4:3. But they are far closer to that than they are to 16:9 movies. Photos get cropped less when displayed full screen on an iPad than on a wide format screen. I think you made my point when you mentioned other photo ratios. The closer to square you get, the worse they look on wide-format screens. You would get an awful lot more and worse vertical letter boxing, versus the simple horizontal letter boxing you see when you view a 16:9 movie on an iPad. Personally, I would rather have the letterboxed movies.
Kizedek I think you've given perfect answers as to why 4:3 is best for the iPad.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69
Actually a wider aspect ratio is good for a number of things including viewing of pics, reading a column of text, certain types of games, apps that leverage a wide screen (IDEs) and others. There is really very little to defend with respect to the 4:3 ratio.
Have you looked at a 35mm negative? The closest format to paper size is or was the 6x7 cm format, other formats are far from 4:3 and some where square. Pics are often printed on common paper sizes but even those vary a bit in aspect ratios.
16:9 ratio for video is itself a compromise: it was chosen as a best fit between the older 4:3 cinema/TV formats and the more recent 2.37:1 cinema format.
As for still photography most formats tend towards 4:3.
I believe the greatest benefit for 16:9 comes from watching on at least a 37 inch screen; other than black bars I doubt it's noticeably different on a 9 inch screen, even less so on 7 inches.
Comments
At this point with the iTunes ecosystem so entrenched, Apple could put a 30 pin dock connector on a bag of pretzels and there would be queue around the block.
Yeah... but they shoulda' made a chocolate covered pretzel with a slot for peanut butter
I don't know jack. I'm just making this stuff up as I go.
I knew Jack... Jack was a friend of mine... You're no Jack...
And
"All work and no play makes Jack... lotsa' Jack!"
I slept on that question and I arrived at the same thing that I said to DaHarder... why would you take two devices (phone plus Galaxy Tab) when you could just take the iPhone and leave the tab at home (the Tab can only be used as a phone if you use Skype). I couldn't see any advantage in also having the Tab with me.
The use case is the same as an iPad in an easier to carry package.
The GT seemed too big (to me) to be any more convenient than the iPad.
That is highly debatable but probably isn't worth a discussion because everyones needs are different. I will only say that in many cases a smaller device will be prefered.
It won't fit into a pocket easily and might as well be left at home. If it is to be left at home then I would much rather have the screen real estate that my iPad offers.
You see this is where you fall down, because you imple that somthing that doesn't fit into a pocket isn't worth taking along. It is really just the opposite in my mind, the more manageable size means that it is easier to take along. The only issue being the devices ability to deliver your required apps effectively in the field. Some apps require a big screen but most do not.
Other than Flash I didn't see anything that the GT offered over the iPad.
Just my observations.
Well size for one. If you have been brain washed into believing that bigger is always beter than this can be hard to swallow. But it is a reality.
TABs biggest short coming is Android more than anything. It is not however short on other useful features. Somebody else has already covered the OS issue but to paraphrase there's nothing ready in the short term for alternative tablets. I like RIMs use of QNX but they are a long way from having a viable tablet SDK, android just doesn't do it for me so at the moment Apple is the only player. More than anything else it is the issue of OS'es suitable for the devices that is inhibiting competition.
Would you say that the competition is moving pretty slowly compared to the general rate of technology these days? The ipad has outpaced the competition to the point that:
*the nearest competitor, android, still doesn't have an os that they feel is right for a tablet device, even as hardware manufacturers are trying to push into the market
*Other competitors like rim and hp/palm also don't even have an os ready for a tablet device.
*the iPad seems to be succeedIng to the point where they can manage better pricing through more volume. Entry devices are looking to compete by going smaller.
I know you were asking someone else, but I think this is an easy one.
The rest of the world seems to be moving slowly because they are starting from so far behind. Before the iPad was released everyone thought tablets had to run a full os (you know, with printer drivers and running Microsoft Office and such).
Of course, that is how the industry had been trying to make tablets for years, but no one seemed to see that there was another way until they saw how sleek and fast and fun the iPad was. Long battery life, the App eco system and lightning responsiveness didn't just happen with the iPad, Apple had been working on the tablet for years and laying the groundwork while everyone else was waiting for Windows 7!
I think it is a credit to Google that Android even close to becoming credible competition. You can see why Jobs was so angry when Google entered this arena. Of course Google had a member on Apple's board for years, so it is fair to wonder what Android would look like if they had to do it all on their own...
7x5 is lab coat sized and can be used by the medical people in the tens of millions of units world wide.
go to an apple store grab a touch and a ipad . Put side by side and there seems to be a form factor missing .
9
You see this is where you fall down, because you imple that somthing that doesn't fit into a pocket isn't worth taking along. It is really just the opposite in my mind, the more manageable size means that it is easier to take along. The only issue being the devices ability to deliver your required apps effectively in the field. Some apps require a big screen but most do not.
Well size for one. If you have been brain washed into believing that bigger is always beter than this can be hard to swallow. But it is a reality.
I imply that something that doesn't fit into a pocket isn't worth taking along?!
HUH?
I implied that if I'm going to take something along that doesn't easily fit into my pocket then it doesn't matter whether I take the GT or the iPad because I'm going to have to stick the damn thing into something less convenient than a pocket... in that case I'll take the iPad... and it has nothing to do with being brainwashed into believing that bigger is always better. Bigger is better if the next best choice is something smaller, almost as expensive and no less convenient to carry around and has less functionality (imo)... especially if you already have an iPhone that is a much better choice for a convenient package that does everything including being able to be used as a phone.
I read all the posts here today and i think apple will bring out a 8x5 7x5 ipad or touch IOS device in 3 yrs .
7x5 is lab coat sized and can be used by the medical people in the tens of millions of units world wide.
go to an apple store grab a touch and a ipad . Put side by side and there seems to be a form factor missing .
9
I think if you do a web search for "iPad Lab Coat", you will find that there are quite a few lab coats with pockets that can hold the iPad -- so that has become less of an issue.
When I am carrying a lot of gear (Cameras, tripod, iPhone, iPad, Folding chair) I carry the iPad in a holster with a shoulder strap. My camera bag (containing 2 cameras, batteries, SD cards andmy iPhone) also attaches to the iPad Holster strap -- freeing both hands for the tripod and chair.
Well obviously I just did! Aspect ratio is very important if one of your primary use cases is the delivery of video and movies. Obviously there is no perfect aspect ratio, but the point is wider would have been smarter on the iPad.
If it were mostly for looking at movies. Since it's not, widescreen would have compromised many other applications in favor of one.
Actually a wider aspect ratio is good for a number of things including viewing of pics, reading a column of text, certain types of games, apps that leverage a wide screen (IDEs) and others. There is really very little to defend with respect to the 4:3 ratio.
Wow. Did you get a certain sinking feeling while you were typing that? Because it must have occurred to you, as it would to anyone reading that list, that you're just strenuously pretending.
Pictures are not better on a wide screen, you have to shrink or crop to fit them in. A column of text is typically part of multiple columns and or images on a full page layout, which is better on the iPad. "Certain games"? Care to name one? "Apps that leverage widescreen"? Care to name one? And yes, I suppose an app specifically written to an aspect ratio is going to fare better on that aspect ratio than another, how is that a selling point?
Don't be dense you would actually be increasing usability especially as the screen becomes smaller. For example grab an iPhone and type in text into this very dialog box. You get constant scrolling in horizontal orientation. The easiest way to improve iPhone, without blowing it up size wise is to give it a wider screen.
The same physical realities are at work when you are dealing with sub seven inch displays. You need one orientation that is much wider than the other to realize effective UI elements like keyboards.
You're making the case for rendering a 7" screen somewhat more usable, not for why the iPad needs to be widescreen. I don't think anyone is arguing that HTC should make a 4:3 7" tablet.
Yep and everyone of those text delivery formats works better on a taller screen. Especially on a small device. Think about newspapers and their centuries of experience with columns of text. Papers are arrainged the way they are because it enhances readability as would a wide screen display offer up text in vertical mode. The science here is very clear. Just because Apple effectively markets it's choice of aspect ratios doesn't mean that that ratio is a good solution from the human factors perspective.
Yikes, again with the crazy talk. If widescreen layouts are so desirable, why don't newspapers come in long tall strips?
The fact is that books, magazines, newspapers, flyers, brochures, pamphlets and, critically, web pages all tend closer to 4:3 than widescreen, because narrow columns feel constrained. Yes, text may be laid out in columns as an element on a page. The iPad lets me look at the whole page. You're trying to argue that there's something wonderful in being forced to only look at the constituent elements, one at a time. As I say, crazy talk.
Again I have to question if you really know what you are talking about. Have you looked at a 35mm negative? The closest format to paper size is or was the 6x7 cm format, other formats are far from 4:3 and some where square. Pics are often printed on common paper sizes but even those vary a bit in aspect ratios
OK, so which common film format is closer to 16:9, again?
Exactly! How would you type up notes on a sub seven in device without it being wide screen? The keyboard would still be a compromise but would be significantly wider, in horizontal mode, than a keyboard on a 4:3 ratio device.
Again, an argument for how to make a 7" screen have some utility, not for why the iPad needs to go widescreen.
Like a steno pad? If you want something bigger then you have more options, but as devices get smaller usability goes out the window with 4:3 aspect ratios. Besides ask yourself this; in a notebook what is the aspect ratio of the working surface?
And again. Also, 8.5x11, which is what I consider the working surface of a notebook, is far closer to 4:3 than 16:9, so I'm not sure what your point is.
Or turn it vertically and user reader mode to read the text like you would in a newspaper. I'm not sure why you are struggling so much here, it is pretty simple really.
Surprisingly, I don't carry a little vertical mask so as to read newspapers a column at a time with no awareness of anything surrounding.
Nope not at all, what we are looking at is the human factors issues that have been with us for thousands of years now when it comes to reading text. Plus the smarter media delivery that comes with a wide screen.
Good lord. It's like talking to someone from an alternate world. Where are all these long and tall text delivery systems? Why isn't the standard paper size something like 12X7 instead of 11 x 8.5?
You mis a couple of important points. First there are billions of people on the planet. Second there are millions of those that buy whatever Apple feeds them. Some even bought AppleTVs. Beyound that we really don't know what Apple tested or what they intend to deliver on other devices. Apple could deliver a wide screen device and simply call it a video iPod.
Ah, the old "it's only popular because of Apple's mysterious powers of hypnosis" canard. No need to pay any mind to the available evidence, it's all smoke and mirrors.
As for developers and apps, they have been fitting apps to the available tech since the start of the computer age. In a very literal sense you work with what you have be that a TTY, an 80x20 text display or an OpenGL driven display. In this case developers see a platform that they can make lots of money on so they optimize for the device, which should surprise no one.
Which is why Samsung should make an 6 x 14 tablet. It will give us even more of that wonderful column goodness, and app developers will simply adapt.
Good lord. It's like talking to someone from an alternate world.
Bingo!!!
I think if you do a web search for "iPad Lab Coat", you will find that there are quite a few lab coats with pockets that can hold the iPad -- so that has become less of an issue.
When I am carrying a lot of gear (Cameras, tripod, iPhone, iPad, Folding chair) I carry the iPad in a holster with a shoulder strap. My camera bag (containing 2 cameras, batteries, SD cards andmy iPhone) also attaches to the iPad Holster strap -- freeing both hands for the tripod and chair.
agreed
i only feel for sales to hit tens of millions world wide it needs to be a tad smaller .
i predict that we have only touched base on the incredible uses that ios devices hold .
my ipod touch still amazes me .
peace
9
If it were mostly for looking at movies. Since it's not, widescreen would have compromised many other applications in favor of one.
Wow. Did you get a certain sinking feeling while you were typing that? Because it must have occurred to you, as it would to anyone reading that list, that you're just strenuously pretending.
Pictures are not better on a wide screen, you have to shrink or crop to fit them in. A column of text is typically part of multiple columns and or images on a full page layout, which is better on the iPad. "Certain games"? Care to name one? "Apps that leverage widescreen"? Care to name one? And yes, I suppose an app specifically written to an aspect ratio is going to fare better on that aspect ratio than another, how is that a selling point?
You're making the case for rendering a 7" screen somewhat more usable, not for why the iPad needs to be widescreen. I don't think anyone is arguing that HTC should make a 4:3 7" tablet.
Yikes, again with the crazy talk. If widescreen layouts are so desirable, why don't newspapers come in long tall strips?
The fact is that books, magazines, newspapers, flyers, brochures, pamphlets and, critically, web pages all tend closer to 4:3 than widescreen, because narrow columns feel constrained. Yes, text may be laid out in columns as an element on a page. The iPad lets me look at the whole page. You're trying to argue that there's something wonderful in being forced to only look at the constituent elements, one at a time. As I say, crazy talk.
OK, so which common film format is closer to 16:9, again?
Again, an argument for how to make a 7" screen have some utility, not for why the iPad needs to go widescreen.
And again. Also, 8.5x11, which is what I consider the working surface of a notebook, is far closer to 4:3 than 16:9, so I'm not sure what your point is.
Surprisingly, I don't carry a little vertical mask so as to read newspapers a column at a time with no awareness of anything surrounding.
Good lord. It's like talking to someone from an alternate world. Where are all these long and tall text delivery systems? Why isn't the standard paper size something like 12X7 instead of 11 x 8.5?
Ah, the old "it's only popular because of Apple's mysterious powers of hypnosis" canard. No need to pay any mind to the available evidence, it's all smoke and mirrors.
Which is why Samsung should make an 6 x 14 tablet. It will give us even more of that wonderful column goodness, and app developers will simply adapt.
i hit my funny bone
i didn't mean too.
The thing is that tablet PCs aren't as functional as desktop PCs. Sure, I'd like an iPad, but there's no possible way I'd substitute it over a laptop. Right now tablet PCs are fun to play with, but there's not much real work you can achieve with them. You can do simple word process, watch movies, and play games, but they're nothing near what a real PC can do. Try typing with a physical keyboard, then type with the keyboard on an iPad and watch how much your WPM drops. The thing is that smaller, touchscreen devices simply can't do as much as a manual device. I'm not taking away from the iPad, but the people who are expecting tablet PCs to do everything a desktop PC can do will be disappointed (e.g. the 11 million people who bought the iPad over a computer). (Kudos to Apple for selling millions of these things, by the way.)
give apple 4 gen of ipads and you'll see your whole point deflated
Well obviously I just did!
Of course you did, don't be dense. Previously, you said, "there is a thought in the industry." Where, who?
Aspect ratio is very important if one of your primary use cases is the delivery of video and movies. Obviously there is no perfect aspect ratio, but the point is wider would have been smarter on the iPad.
As for this point and the rest of your points, I think you are just confusing yourself; and I am forced to conclude you don't know what you are talking about...
You began your initial post by comparing competitors' 7in tablets to the iPad. Of course, there is only one iPad at the moment. So when you state that Apple has gotten the size and aspect ratio of the iPad wrong, we have to assume you are talking about the 9.7 in, 4:3, 1024 x 768 iPad that I am typing this post on right now, and not some hypothetical 7in iPad or oversize video iPod that Apple may or may not release in the future to "remain competitive", according to your unnamed pundits.
So as you complain how the iPad is too large, I don't understand why you think it should be made "wider". Rather, it is already "taller" than the competing 7inchers (in landscape). To go smaller and wide format, would be like making the iPad 1024 x640 or so. We would lose some 120 pixels off the narrow side, which is extremely useful for most productive purposes. I would have this full keyboard up, but little space above the keyboard to see the text I am now typing. I might see as much of this webpage as i see now, but at the expense of the browser bar above. What good is that?
I think you are arguing for the sake of it, and making a poor argument at that. Portrait or landscape, my iPad is very usable. I don't want it squished down wider. At the same screen size of 9.7 in, that would make it too tall in portrait mode and less compact to carry. Reduce the screen size like the competitors have done, and as i have noted, you 1) lose productive vertical space in landscape mode, and 2) portrait mode for reading or creating becomes unnatural.
Furethermore, I don't agree that watching movies is the primary purpose. A wider format would be odd to use productively in portrait mode. It would be like reading a long receipt rather than a book.
I didn't say most photos are exactly 4:3. But they are far closer to that than they are to 16:9 movies. Photos get cropped less when displayed full screen on an iPad than on a wide format screen. I think you made my point when you mentioned other photo ratios. The closer to square you get, the worse they look on wide-format screens. You would get an awful lot more and worse vertical letter boxing, versus the simple horizontal letter boxing you see when you view a 16:9 movie on an iPad. Personally, I would rather have the letterboxed movies.
BTW, I am a free-lancer who does photography, videography and video editing, DTP, web design and presentations all on a professional basis. This 4:3 format is a lot more versatile for all these things than a wider format would be.
This tells me all I need to know about you .... as they say in Texas ..... "All hat, no cattle"
I was going to let this go, but its been bugging me...
I don't think I was claiming to have a big hat--all I said was "as a shareholder." I didn't claim to be a major player. Like many Apple fans on this site, my passion for all things Apple predates my financial interest in the company.
And certainly there has to be more to know about me than the fact that I did not invest in Apple the first few times I thought it was a good idea!
[/end defensive rant]
Right now tablet PCs are fun to play with, but there's not much real work you can achieve with them.
It's a matter of perspective and people choosing the right tool for the job: a surgeon won't achieve much real work in their profession with a blowtorch.
There are tasks and uses for which the iPad is perfect.
So as you complain how the iPad is too large, I don't understand why you think it should be made "wider". Rather, it is already "taller" than the competing 7inchers (in landscape). To go smaller and wide format, would be like making the iPad 1024 x640 or so. We would lose some 120 pixels off the narrow side, which is extremely useful for most productive purposes.
Portrait or landscape, my iPad is very usable. I don't want it squished down wider. At the same screen size of 9.7 in, that would make it too tall in portrait mode and less compact to carry. Reduce the screen size like the competitors have done, and as i have noted, you 1) lose productive vertical space in landscape mode, and 2) portrait mode for reading or creating becomes unnatural.
Furethermore, I don't agree that watching movies is the primary purpose. A wider format would be odd to use productively in portrait mode.
It would be like reading a long receipt rather than a book.
I didn't say most photos are exactly 4:3. But they are far closer to that than they are to 16:9 movies. Photos get cropped less when displayed full screen on an iPad than on a wide format screen. I think you made my point when you mentioned other photo ratios. The closer to square you get, the worse they look on wide-format screens. You would get an awful lot more and worse vertical letter boxing, versus the simple horizontal letter boxing you see when you view a 16:9 movie on an iPad. Personally, I would rather have the letterboxed movies.
Kizedek I think you've given perfect answers as to why 4:3 is best for the iPad.
Actually a wider aspect ratio is good for a number of things including viewing of pics, reading a column of text, certain types of games, apps that leverage a wide screen (IDEs) and others. There is really very little to defend with respect to the 4:3 ratio.
Have you looked at a 35mm negative? The closest format to paper size is or was the 6x7 cm format, other formats are far from 4:3 and some where square. Pics are often printed on common paper sizes but even those vary a bit in aspect ratios.
16:9 ratio for video is itself a compromise: it was chosen as a best fit between the older 4:3 cinema/TV formats and the more recent 2.37:1 cinema format.
As for still photography most formats tend towards 4:3.
I believe the greatest benefit for 16:9 comes from watching on at least a 37 inch screen; other than black bars I doubt it's noticeably different on a 9 inch screen, even less so on 7 inches.
The iPad isn't solely for video.
I'll stick with the leader, Apple ... both for product and stock. I'm looking forward to their plans for the new data center as well.
It's a smart bet. For the next 6-7 years at least.
I invested quite a bit in innuendo. Made out like a bandit.
Innuendo ... isn't that the Italian suppository manufacturer?