"not as enjoyable" doesn't mean that it's not possible or useful.
Lots of people surf the web or watch movies on their iPhone with a 3.5" screen. What makes you think that they wouldn't enjoy doing that even more on a 7" iPad?
For some people (maybe even most people), a 7" iPad would be too small. But not everyone. There are apparently plenty of people who prefer the smaller tablet. Consider, for example, that Android tablets are available in both 7" and 10" sizes. By most reports, they two roughly split the market - that is, about 1/2 of the market is 7" and half is 10". So, when given a choice, roughly half of the people choose the smaller version. Yet your same argument (it's not as enjoyable on a smaller screen) applies to Android, so apparently, there's something that makes up for the 'not as enjoyable' factor. It may be portability, it may be price, but the smaller model also has some advantages, as well. In the end, when you give people the choice (as in Android), about half choose the smaller screen. I don't see anything that suggests that the same thing wouldn't be true for the iPad.
Cost is also a factor. For many people buying a smaller device at a lower cost is a "good enough" alternative. That may be a fine approach for a company entering the market and needing to differentiate itself from the dominant player but for a company that's doing well on a profit-per-unit basis, introducing a lower-priced alternative isn't necessarily the best approach absent some serious differentiation between products. So if, for example, I'm selling as many $100 items as I can make, it's not necessarily good business sense to compete with myself at a lower price point.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
"not as enjoyable" doesn't mean that it's not possible or useful.
Lots of people surf the web or watch movies on their iPhone with a 3.5" screen. What makes you think that they wouldn't enjoy doing that even more on a 7" iPad?
For some people (maybe even most people), a 7" iPad would be too small. But not everyone. There are apparently plenty of people who prefer the smaller tablet. Consider, for example, that Android tablets are available in both 7" and 10" sizes. By most reports, they two roughly split the market - that is, about 1/2 of the market is 7" and half is 10". So, when given a choice, roughly half of the people choose the smaller version. Yet your same argument (it's not as enjoyable on a smaller screen) applies to Android, so apparently, there's something that makes up for the 'not as enjoyable' factor. It may be portability, it may be price, but the smaller model also has some advantages, as well. In the end, when you give people the choice (as in Android), about half choose the smaller screen. I don't see anything that suggests that the same thing wouldn't be true for the iPad.
Cost is also a factor. For many people buying a smaller device at a lower cost is a "good enough" alternative. That may be a fine approach for a company entering the market and needing to differentiate itself from the dominant player but for a company that's doing well on a profit-per-unit basis, introducing a lower-priced alternative isn't necessarily the best approach absent some serious differentiation between products. So if, for example, I'm selling as many $100 items as I can make, it's not necessarily good business sense to compete with myself at a lower price point.