Apple offers different screen sizes for their iMac, so why are different screen sizes for iPad and iPhone such a silly idea?
Choice > No Choice
Choice is only good after Apple decides to give you a choice. Before Apple decides to give you a choice, choice is bad. So right now there is no reason why anyone should want an iPad Mini, but if Apple creates one, it will be magical.
Choice is only good after Apple decides to give you a choice. Before Apple decides to give you a choice, choice is bad. So right now there is no reason why anyone should want an iPad Mini, but if Apple creates one, it will be magical.
It's a myth that more choice is always good, anyways.
Consistency is a positive, and while choice can be good, it can also confuse matters.
Because interacting with a keyboard/mouse driven interface is quite different than interacting with a touch-driven device.
Sure but interacting with touch screens is very much the same.
Also, the difference between developing applications for a 24" screen or a 27" screen is essentially non-existent. Developing apps for differently sized devices, however, is a different matter.
Baloney! IOS is resolution independent, there is nothing to get excited about when it comes to different screen sizes. Well at least for developers following Apples developer guidelines. Honestly folks Appple made it clear to developers years ago that different sized and resolution devices where possible in the future.
Choice is only good after Apple decides to give you a choice. Before Apple decides to give you a choice, choice is bad. So right now there is no reason why anyone should want an iPad Mini, but if Apple creates one, it will be magical.
The issue most of the forum members have with the idea of a 7" or 8" iPad is that the exclusive source of all such rumors has been DigiTimes. As forum member, shrfu31, notes DigiTimes has a less than stellar record of Apple predictions and provides a link to an article discussing their trustworthiness as a source.
This brings up a question for me - does anyone know whether the touch resolution (or sensitivity) of the iPad surface is? Has it changed since the implementation of Retina Display?
It has not. In code, applications refer to points, not pixels. A finger touches a point, not a pixel. The fact that on a retina display a "point" consists of 4 pixels is essentially irrelevant/unavailable to the developer creating apps (with the exception of providing double-resolution images where necessary).
I don't think that screen size is big enough to express great tablet apps.
That is like saying the iPhone is too small to express great apps. Reality is though that some Variants of iOS apps are actually better on an iPhone versus the iPad. Sometimes constraints force developers to think hard about functionality. Beyond that if a device is too big for certain uses it doesn't matter how good the apps are, physical limitations will keep it from consideration.
The issue most of the forum members have with the idea of a 7" or 8" iPad is that the exclusive source of all such rumors has been DigiTimes. As forum member, shrfu31, notes DigiTimes has a less than stellar record of Apple predictions and provides a link to an article discussing their trustworthiness as a source.
DigiTimes doesn't predict anything, rather they report everything that comes their way. There is a big difference. It is up to the reader to provide his own reasoning skills to determine if something is valid or not. Beyond that I was under the impression that the 7" iPad rumors started someplace else and further DigiTimes isn't a sole source here.
It's a myth that more choice is always good, anyways.
Consistency is a positive, and while choice can be good, it can also confuse matters.
Exactly! At my last count there were 136 Android-based phones by 36 consumer electronics companies. Notably, Android fans tout the freedom of the platform but when discussing performance only discuss the premium, marquee smartphones of three manufacturers (HTC, Motorola, Samsung). If choice was so good they would be discussing Huawei and ZTE smartphones as well. More choice isn't always better.
I laughed pretty hard when I scrolled down and saw what I knew was coming. I think I would have blown coffee out my nose had it been large enough that the DI and ES had disappeared off the sides. While I don't mind reading their usually unsubstantiated rumors, it does seem fair to suggest that maybe Apple Insider should simply post "Digitimes" in an overblown font, skip the "rumors," and let us cut right to the commenting. I enjoy reading them a lot more, anyway.
Edit: My god, I misspelled "nose." One of those days.
Because interacting with a keyboard/mouse driven interface is quite different than interacting with a touch-driven device.
Sure but interacting with touch screens is very much the same.
Quote:
Also, the difference between developing applications for a 24" screen or a 27" screen is essentially non-existent. Developing apps for differently sized devices, however, is a different matter.
Baloney! IOS is resolution independent, there is nothing to get excited about when it comes to different screen sizes. Well at least for developers following Apples developer guidelines. Honestly folks Appple made it clear to developers years ago that different sized and resolution devices where possible in the future.Baloney! IOS is resolution independent, there is nothing to get excited about when it comes to different screen sizes. Well at least for developers following Apples developer guidelines. Honestly folks Appple made it clear to developers years ago that different sized and resolution devices where possible in the future.
Wizard69, you are wrong on all points (or I'm misunderstanding you).
iOS is not resolution independent. Developers have to specifically code for 2 different screen sizes (and account for the double-resolution retina display). The first thing you decide when you start a new project is iPhone/iPod touch only; iPad only; or "universal." From that point on, every screen is designed around one or both of those screen layouts. When designing for the iPad, you know you have a bigger screen to work with and you size all the UI components correspondingly to they can be comfortably tapped/dragged without being needlessly large. To all of a sudden have your app presented on a device with a smaller screen will affect usability.
In theory Apple could introduce a third format with a new resolution between that of the iPhone and the iPad, but there has been zero evidence of them suggesting they will do that any time soon and it would a very big deal for developers. Every iPad and universal app would have to be updated or at least reviewed.
I can imagine Apple giving developers a few months notice that they should review their iPad apps to make sure they would still work fine if the pixels were closer together (i.e., same height and width in terms of points, but smaller in terms of inches). But I don't expect this.
I would be very surprised if Apple announced a third "tweener" format with different logical dimensions. That would be a nightmare for developers and for Apple to try to manage.
If Apple indeed comes with a mini iPad to compete with the Kindle Fire, then in my view Apple went from Leader to Follower less than a year after Steve Jobs' death. Sad indeed.
There does appear to be demand for a 7" iPad. Why walk away from customers waving dollars in their face? Apple would be a fool not to cater to this audience.
Is there really? After all Apple is selling their 10" iPads like crazy while the other boys with their 7" tablets don't see to be making a real dent in the game. Given that it's hard to say that there's a huge market. Seems like the folks really buying at that smaller level are getting ebook readers because they don't care about the other bells. Apple making a 7" iPad isn't likely to grab them since it's way more than they want.
And consider the costs of fragmenting their product lines versus trying to persuade folks that yes in fact they do want the 10" iPad. Apple wanted the schools for example so they had tools made that fit that screen, they keep the iPad 2 base models at a cheaper price and they got the textbook companies to publicly announce they have bought into creating for the 10 inch iPad. Rather than making a cheaper, smaller model iPad to entice the schools. Same for businesses etc.
I don't doubt that Apple tried a number of sizes for the iPad. I don't doubt that Apple might think about revamping the iPod Touch to be a bit larger. I don't doubt that Apple is testing various displays etc to find ones that are crisper, less reflective, less prone to scratches etc. Even thinner and lighter so they can either make the whole device thinner or have more room for battery etc. But testing doesn't equal using. Some things fail the test and end up on the shelf of rejected prototypes just above the shelf of patents Apple has but is never planning to use in their own products (but has no issue with licensing to others so they make a little cash off the IP)
If Apple indeed comes with a mini iPad to compete with the Kindle Fire, then in my view Apple went from Leader to Follower less than a year after Steve Jobs' death. Sad indeed.
... and if Apple does make a smaller form factor iPad and it turns out to be a hot seller with high margin... then who gives a shit about leader/follower.
Actually, Apple would still be a leader if the above scenario played out. I'll let you figure it out.
I don't think that screen size is big enough to express great tablet apps.
while generally I think that ZZZ is a twerp who just rattles off stuff to get attention, I think he's right on this one. When you are talking about tablet apps, the experience isn't the same. And yes a 7-8" screen very possibly isn't prime which is why Apple rejected it and Steve Jobs expressed that rejection publicly
But I also agree with those that say that sometimes things are better smaller. by way of example, some of you might be familiar with an iOS game called Temple Run. My little brother adores it. For those that don't know, it's a first person runner/shooter where you use various flicks to turn, jump and slide around. you can also tilt your device to pick up coins, run along broken walls etc. At first he was playing it on my iPad. very pretty big graphics, a bear when you needed to tilt to avoid falling off something too wide of a gap to jump over. When I got my new iPhone I decided to give him my old one and that was the first game we put on it. way way better to play on the iPhone, although my brother wishes they would do a dual screen where he can use the iPhone as his controller and still see the pretty graphics. or better yet, support airplay so he can put it on the tv.
on the flip side, he won't play Draw Something on the iPhone because it's too small. he hates reading on the iPhone (again too small) and so on. Those are better bigger. Same with things like iMovie, iPhoto, general sketching. I often film and take photos at work with my iPhone because it's easier to keep steady. but then it goes on my iPad for the labeling, editing and such.
If Apple indeed comes with a mini iPad to compete with the Kindle Fire, then in my view Apple went from Leader to Follower less than a year after Steve Jobs' death. Sad indeed.
If Apple comes out with a 5-7" device it won't be to compete with anyone but to fill some need that folks might not even realize they have until Apple tells them how the new device is filling it. And it will be soooo far above the Fire that it won't be competing with but more schooling Amazon on what they should have done. Just as Steve designed said product before he died (yeah you read that right, tech takes so long to go from idea to product that 'Steve Jobs' Apple' won't end for a good 3-4 years more)
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by rtm135
Apple offers different screen sizes for their iMac, so why are different screen sizes for iPad and iPhone such a silly idea?
Choice > No Choice
Choice is only good after Apple decides to give you a choice. Before Apple decides to give you a choice, choice is bad. So right now there is no reason why anyone should want an iPad Mini, but if Apple creates one, it will be magical.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gwlaw99
Choice is only good after Apple decides to give you a choice. Before Apple decides to give you a choice, choice is bad. So right now there is no reason why anyone should want an iPad Mini, but if Apple creates one, it will be magical.
It's a myth that more choice is always good, anyways.
Consistency is a positive, and while choice can be good, it can also confuse matters.
Why is this story under "Genius Bar"?
YEEECCCHHH ....
Baloney! IOS is resolution independent, there is nothing to get excited about when it comes to different screen sizes. Well at least for developers following Apples developer guidelines. Honestly folks Appple made it clear to developers years ago that different sized and resolution devices where possible in the future.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gwlaw99
Choice is only good after Apple decides to give you a choice. Before Apple decides to give you a choice, choice is bad. So right now there is no reason why anyone should want an iPad Mini, but if Apple creates one, it will be magical.
The issue most of the forum members have with the idea of a 7" or 8" iPad is that the exclusive source of all such rumors has been DigiTimes. As forum member, shrfu31, notes DigiTimes has a less than stellar record of Apple predictions and provides a link to an article discussing their trustworthiness as a source.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ankleskater
This brings up a question for me - does anyone know whether the touch resolution (or sensitivity) of the iPad surface is? Has it changed since the implementation of Retina Display?
It has not. In code, applications refer to points, not pixels. A finger touches a point, not a pixel. The fact that on a retina display a "point" consists of 4 pixels is essentially irrelevant/unavailable to the developer creating apps (with the exception of providing double-resolution images where necessary).
That is like saying the iPhone is too small to express great apps. Reality is though that some Variants of iOS apps are actually better on an iPhone versus the iPad. Sometimes constraints force developers to think hard about functionality. Beyond that if a device is too big for certain uses it doesn't matter how good the apps are, physical limitations will keep it from consideration.
DigiTimes doesn't predict anything, rather they report everything that comes their way. There is a big difference. It is up to the reader to provide his own reasoning skills to determine if something is valid or not. Beyond that I was under the impression that the 7" iPad rumors started someplace else and further DigiTimes isn't a sole source here.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AaronJ
It's a myth that more choice is always good, anyways.
Consistency is a positive, and while choice can be good, it can also confuse matters.
Exactly! At my last count there were 136 Android-based phones by 36 consumer electronics companies. Notably, Android fans tout the freedom of the platform but when discussing performance only discuss the premium, marquee smartphones of three manufacturers (HTC, Motorola, Samsung). If choice was so good they would be discussing Huawei and ZTE smartphones as well. More choice isn't always better.
"Rumor: Apple's 7.85" iPad will use thin-film touch technology"
The problem is, there won't be a 7.85" iPad. So it's a rumor about a rumor.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
DigiTimes.
Don't make me laugh.
Until you actually try to use the device, sure.
I laughed pretty hard when I scrolled down and saw what I knew was coming. I think I would have blown coffee out my nose had it been large enough that the DI and ES had disappeared off the sides. While I don't mind reading their usually unsubstantiated rumors, it does seem fair to suggest that maybe Apple Insider should simply post "Digitimes" in an overblown font, skip the "rumors," and let us cut right to the commenting. I enjoy reading them a lot more, anyway.
Edit: My god, I misspelled "nose." One of those days.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69
Quote:
Originally Posted by AaronJ
Because interacting with a keyboard/mouse driven interface is quite different than interacting with a touch-driven device.
Sure but interacting with touch screens is very much the same.
Quote:
Also, the difference between developing applications for a 24" screen or a 27" screen is essentially non-existent. Developing apps for differently sized devices, however, is a different matter.
Baloney! IOS is resolution independent, there is nothing to get excited about when it comes to different screen sizes. Well at least for developers following Apples developer guidelines. Honestly folks Appple made it clear to developers years ago that different sized and resolution devices where possible in the future.Baloney! IOS is resolution independent, there is nothing to get excited about when it comes to different screen sizes. Well at least for developers following Apples developer guidelines. Honestly folks Appple made it clear to developers years ago that different sized and resolution devices where possible in the future.
Wizard69, you are wrong on all points (or I'm misunderstanding you).
iOS is not resolution independent. Developers have to specifically code for 2 different screen sizes (and account for the double-resolution retina display). The first thing you decide when you start a new project is iPhone/iPod touch only; iPad only; or "universal." From that point on, every screen is designed around one or both of those screen layouts. When designing for the iPad, you know you have a bigger screen to work with and you size all the UI components correspondingly to they can be comfortably tapped/dragged without being needlessly large. To all of a sudden have your app presented on a device with a smaller screen will affect usability.
In theory Apple could introduce a third format with a new resolution between that of the iPhone and the iPad, but there has been zero evidence of them suggesting they will do that any time soon and it would a very big deal for developers. Every iPad and universal app would have to be updated or at least reviewed.
I can imagine Apple giving developers a few months notice that they should review their iPad apps to make sure they would still work fine if the pixels were closer together (i.e., same height and width in terms of points, but smaller in terms of inches). But I don't expect this.
I would be very surprised if Apple announced a third "tweener" format with different logical dimensions. That would be a nightmare for developers and for Apple to try to manage.
If Apple indeed comes with a mini iPad to compete with the Kindle Fire, then in my view Apple went from Leader to Follower less than a year after Steve Jobs' death. Sad indeed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Curmudgeon
There does appear to be demand for a 7" iPad. Why walk away from customers waving dollars in their face? Apple would be a fool not to cater to this audience.
Is there really? After all Apple is selling their 10" iPads like crazy while the other boys with their 7" tablets don't see to be making a real dent in the game. Given that it's hard to say that there's a huge market. Seems like the folks really buying at that smaller level are getting ebook readers because they don't care about the other bells. Apple making a 7" iPad isn't likely to grab them since it's way more than they want.
And consider the costs of fragmenting their product lines versus trying to persuade folks that yes in fact they do want the 10" iPad. Apple wanted the schools for example so they had tools made that fit that screen, they keep the iPad 2 base models at a cheaper price and they got the textbook companies to publicly announce they have bought into creating for the 10 inch iPad. Rather than making a cheaper, smaller model iPad to entice the schools. Same for businesses etc.
I don't doubt that Apple tried a number of sizes for the iPad. I don't doubt that Apple might think about revamping the iPod Touch to be a bit larger. I don't doubt that Apple is testing various displays etc to find ones that are crisper, less reflective, less prone to scratches etc. Even thinner and lighter so they can either make the whole device thinner or have more room for battery etc. But testing doesn't equal using. Some things fail the test and end up on the shelf of rejected prototypes just above the shelf of patents Apple has but is never planning to use in their own products (but has no issue with licensing to others so they make a little cash off the IP)
Quote:
Originally Posted by gwlaw99
Choice is only good after Apple decides to give you a choice. Before Apple decides to give you a choice,
You always had a choice. Apple's stuff or someone else's.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
DigiTimes.
Don't make me laugh.
Needs this with it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roos24
If Apple indeed comes with a mini iPad to compete with the Kindle Fire, then in my view Apple went from Leader to Follower less than a year after Steve Jobs' death. Sad indeed.
... and if Apple does make a smaller form factor iPad and it turns out to be a hot seller with high margin... then who gives a shit about leader/follower.
Actually, Apple would still be a leader if the above scenario played out. I'll let you figure it out.
I'll tell you what is sad... oh, never mind...
Quote:
Originally Posted by I am a Zither Zather Zuzz
I don't think that screen size is big enough to express great tablet apps.
while generally I think that ZZZ is a twerp who just rattles off stuff to get attention, I think he's right on this one. When you are talking about tablet apps, the experience isn't the same. And yes a 7-8" screen very possibly isn't prime which is why Apple rejected it and Steve Jobs expressed that rejection publicly
But I also agree with those that say that sometimes things are better smaller. by way of example, some of you might be familiar with an iOS game called Temple Run. My little brother adores it. For those that don't know, it's a first person runner/shooter where you use various flicks to turn, jump and slide around. you can also tilt your device to pick up coins, run along broken walls etc. At first he was playing it on my iPad. very pretty big graphics, a bear when you needed to tilt to avoid falling off something too wide of a gap to jump over. When I got my new iPhone I decided to give him my old one and that was the first game we put on it. way way better to play on the iPhone, although my brother wishes they would do a dual screen where he can use the iPhone as his controller and still see the pretty graphics. or better yet, support airplay so he can put it on the tv.
on the flip side, he won't play Draw Something on the iPhone because it's too small. he hates reading on the iPhone (again too small) and so on. Those are better bigger. Same with things like iMovie, iPhoto, general sketching. I often film and take photos at work with my iPhone because it's easier to keep steady. but then it goes on my iPad for the labeling, editing and such.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roos24
If Apple indeed comes with a mini iPad to compete with the Kindle Fire, then in my view Apple went from Leader to Follower less than a year after Steve Jobs' death. Sad indeed.
If Apple comes out with a 5-7" device it won't be to compete with anyone but to fill some need that folks might not even realize they have until Apple tells them how the new device is filling it. And it will be soooo far above the Fire that it won't be competing with but more schooling Amazon on what they should have done. Just as Steve designed said product before he died (yeah you read that right, tech takes so long to go from idea to product that 'Steve Jobs' Apple' won't end for a good 3-4 years more)