Am I the only one that also wants a 15"+ iPad to be made?
I doubt Apple will ever make a larger tablet but if the do, it will be the iPad (graphics) Pro and it will compete with the lovely (OSX/Win accessory) Wacom Cintiq HD. I have my doubts whether Apple is interested in the Pro niche, though. The top of the line Cintiq Touch costs in excess of 3.5 grand (and it's not a stand alone tablet with its own OS)
I actually created GarageBand for the iPad before the iPad even existed. Not an application, but as a GUI mockup.
When the rumors of an Apple tablet came to a head, I decided to go through and do what I figured would become OS XI. GarageBand was one of the applications I redid for touch, and I nailed it. Keyboards and fretboards for various instruments at the bottom and everything.
You are not alone. Bigger is gooder. I have no interest in the iPad as it exists now -- for what I do a laptop is still the best tool for the job -- but I would be interested in a big one. Especially if Adobe made a version of Illustrator for it, and someone offered a pen option!
I would only be interested in a bigger iPad if you could actually draw on it (with a proper stylus). If it had that, then the bigger the better, but otherwise there isn't any point to anything bigger than the current model.
I would only be interested in a bigger iPad if you could actually draw on it (with a proper stylus). If it had that, then the bigger the better, but otherwise there isn't any point to anything bigger than the current model.
I would only be interested in a bigger iPad if you could actually draw on it (with a proper stylus). If it had that, then the bigger the better, but otherwise there isn't any point to anything bigger than the current model.
It's an on/off question. It either supports it or it doesn't. You can certainly use one. As touchscreen tech advances, using one will be better in more situations, is all.
However, Steve Jobs said a 7" tablet isn't useful for very many purposes unless you have sandpaper to file down your fingertips.
Dimensions for a 7" 16:9 and a 7.85" 4:3 screen.
16:9 7" - 6.10 * 3.43 = 20.923 sq in
4:3 7.85" - 6.28 * 4.71 = 29.5788 sq in
41.37% increase
Over 40% more surface area. Even if Steve meant exactly what he said, his opinion of 7" widescreen being a poor choice would not be relevant against something that had 40%+ more screen real estate. I've pointed this out on several threads about this topic.
It's an on/off question. It either supports it or it doesn't. You can certainly use one. As touchscreen tech advances, using one will be better in more situations, is all.
Yes, there are usable styluses (styli?) that can be used on an iPad, and I know many artist do amazing things with one finger, but you'd have a hard time convincing many graphic artists or animators a finger or iPad type stylus is adequate.
Bottom line - a larger iPad would a professional tool and as such would need the specs to satisfy its target user.
Over 40% more surface area. Even if Steve meant exactly what he said, his opinion of 7" widescreen being a poor choice would not be relevant against something that had 40%+ more screen real estate. I've pointed this out on several threads about this topic.
Good point, and also, now, we have screens with much higher resolution than we did at the time the statement was made.
Steve also told his people to think for themselves, not ask WWSJD.
His biography made it clear that he was quick to realize when he was wrong, and that this was a strength of his. The trolls on this forum are hoping to turn this into some kind of issue. Changing his mind wasn't a problem for Steve, but it seems to be a problem for some people on this forum.
Jobs also said a lot of things for a reason. Should I also assume Apple will be adding Flash support to the mini iPad too?
Here's the deal ... We have no idea if Jobs changed his mind on this matter before he died. Apple executives were indeed publicly encouraged to think for themselves. But what Jobs said on any given day can't simply be dismissed as "salesmanship" or chalked up to his reality distortion field to support a particular pundits position simply because Jobs was officially documented to have changed his mind on occasion. Much of what Apple is today is the direct result from Jobs guiding principles, right or wrong. And yes he's been known to change his mind. The point of dredging up Jobs statement about 7" tablets has more to do with guiding principles. This wasn't just Jobs opinion, it was the stated result of considerable experimentation and study by Apple. It's bigger than Jobs, and as if to hammer it home, Jobs made as big an issue out of it as he did Flash. He wasn't wrong about Flash, and I seriously doubt he would have, nor Apple will change their opinions about that, anymore than they will kiss and make up with Google. Likewise with the tablet.
Now that doesn't mean Apple can't make a 7" tablet, but it won't just be a scaled down iPad to compete with Google on their terms. It will be something that adheres not just to Jobs opinion, but to the studies that led to Jobs being able to make such a definitive statement, and to the underlying principles of Apple -- Jobs said many times that Apple wasn't interested in catering to the lowest common denominator unless they could do something significant in that space. Now that's not just an opinion of Jobs, but a corporate philosophy. I don't suggest Apple can't change its mind in that regard, but that's not the governing principles Apple has been traditionally based on, nor the actions investors or consumers have come to expect. So let's say that Apple starts making decisions that are the opposite of Jobs last statuted position on the subject ... They aren't just always reversing his opinion (which "he might have eventually done anyway"), they would be in some cases reversing ideologies that help make Apple what is today. And if that happens, what is Apple then, but just another electronics company.
Yes, there are usable styluses (styli?) that can be used on an iPad, and I know many artist do amazing things with one finger, but you'd have a hard time convincing many graphic artists or animators a finger or iPad type stylus is adequate.
Bottom line - a larger iPad would a professional tool and as such would need the specs to satisfy its target user.
Which means that if Apple ever wanted to produce a pro tablet with a pressure sensitive stylis, they would have to either:
a) license the tech from Wacom, or...
b) buy Wacom outright... which... at the moment would cost ~ $1B. Apple could hand over the Samsung judgement and call it even
Over 40% more surface area. Even if Steve meant exactly what he said, his opinion of 7" widescreen being a poor choice would not be relevant against something that had 40%+ more screen real estate. I've pointed this out on several threads about this topic.
but his comment was false in the face of people using several tens of millions of 3.5" devices quite happily. The size of the device is irrelevant compared to how the realestate is used.
The headline should say resolution not aspect ratio. There is a big difference.
The same aspect ratio but a different resolution would require developers to develop and test test against yet another form factor (iPhone classic, iPhone 4/retina, iPhone 5/tall, iPad classic, iPad/retina, iPad mini). That would suck for developers. Some stuff is automatic, some isn't. If nothing else developers would have to provide new full-screen images for theirs. Not a deal-breaker, but annoying (as we all found out as part of the iPhone 5 roll-out).
On the other hand, the same resolution makes this easy for developers (no work at all), but potentially introduce some usability issues for users. A touch-based user interface designed for a 10" screen doesn't necessarily work perfectly for a 7" screen (hence, Jobs' sharpening your fingertips comment). Everything will be just a little bit smaller, so things that were on the margin of "big enough to easily tap" might fall below that threshhold.
I expect/hope that Apple goes with the same resolution (as the article suggests). But I wouldn't be utterly surprised if they do something else.
[" url="/t/153481/purported-ipad-mini-display-has-same-aspect-ratio-as-full-size-ipad#post_2213461"]That makes sense. Of course it's the same aspect ratio as the full sized iPad!
Unlike Android tablets, iPads are made to be used both in portrait and in landscape.
16:9 on a tablet is not very useful for many purposes.
All tablets can easily switch between portrait and landscape¡ It's especially easy on the MS Surface. All you have to do is exit Metro UI to the standard Windows UI, hover the mouse in the lower-lefthand corner to bring up the screen button to access Start, open Control Panel, open Appearance, open open Display Settings, click on Change Display Settings, Change the Orientation, hit Apply, wait several seconds and hope that the 50/50 guess was the right way because it has no sensor to tell what orientation it's currently in. It couldn't be easier¡
All tablets can easily switch between portrait and landscape¡ It's especially easy on the MS Surface. All you have to do is exit Metro UI to the standard Windows UI, hover the mouse in the lower-lefthand corner to bring up the screen button to access Start, open Control Panel, open Appearance, open open Display Settings, click on Change Display Settings, Change the Orientation, hit Apply, wait several seconds and hope that the 50/50 guess was the right way because it has no sensor to tell what orientation it's currently in. It couldn't be easier¡
... LOL Soli! What's scary about that is you might have accurately described it.
FWIW the Nexus 7 does fine in landscape mode. When used for reading it gives you 2 pages side-by-side similar to opening a book. Gmail works particularly well for me in landscape with the mailbox on the left and the opened mail shown on the right panel allowing me to quickly review and scroll. Perhaps not all Android tablets work the same? Dunno.
FWIW the Nexus 7 does fine in landscape mode. When used for reading it gives you 2 pages side-by-side similar to opening a book. Gmail works particularly well for me in landscape with the mailbox on the left and the opened mail shown on the right panel allowing me to quickly review and scroll. Perhaps not all Android tablets work the same? Dunno.
Android does this satisfactory. I've never seen it transition as seamlessly or smoothly as in iOS but it does it correctly. My problem with the 16:9 tablets is that just aren't great for anything but a widescreen video. Reading simply isn't ideal on that aspect ratio with the 7-10" display. Too wide on one end and too narrow on the other.
Well before the iPad was ever announced I was saying that something around the ol' 4:3 aspect ratio would be ideal. I was laughed at because, as I was told repeatedly, "4:# is an obsolete aspect ratio." I think other tablet makers could have faired better if they copied Apple here. It's funny that we don't see people copying any of the things Apple can't possibly protect and that are key to their success in the industry: user experience.
Why do you do that? It's just not possible that you really believe that, because someone who genuinely did would have to be so utterly cognitively impaired that they would be unable to function in society. Saying that you can draw on an iPad is like saying you can blow up a car with Pop Rocks. It's NOT black/white.
… Can you, or can you not, use a stylus on an iPad. That's the question here. You can. That's the answer here.
Heaven's sake.
Some tasks, while technically *possible* are simply not *practical* in real-world applications, and you KNOW that.
Because the device isn't really designed with a stylus in mind. Yet they can work just fine. Which was the question.
That makes sense. Of course it's the same aspect ratio as the full sized iPad!
Unlike Android tablets, iPads are made to be used both in portrait and in landscape.
16:9 on a tablet is not very useful for many purposes.
Android tablets are not made to be used in portrait and landscape? Can you support that statement with some facts?
Can you give some examples where 16:9 is not very useful?
I use portrait and landscape on my Android and it works great for both. I find I like the 16:9 ratio better than 4:3. The world has gone widescreen but Apple lags behind for some reason.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by MusicComposer
Am I the only one that also wants a 15"+ iPad to be made?
I doubt Apple will ever make a larger tablet but if the do, it will be the iPad (graphics) Pro and it will compete with the lovely (OSX/Win accessory) Wacom Cintiq HD. I have my doubts whether Apple is interested in the Pro niche, though. The top of the line Cintiq Touch costs in excess of 3.5 grand (and it's not a stand alone tablet with its own OS)
Originally Posted by digitalclips
lol Imagine Garage Band 2014... drool.
I actually created GarageBand for the iPad before the iPad even existed. Not an application, but as a GUI mockup.
When the rumors of an Apple tablet came to a head, I decided to go through and do what I figured would become OS XI. GarageBand was one of the applications I redid for touch, and I nailed it. Keyboards and fretboards for various instruments at the bottom and everything.
Quote:
Originally Posted by v5v
You are not alone. Bigger is gooder. I have no interest in the iPad as it exists now -- for what I do a laptop is still the best tool for the job -- but I would be interested in a big one. Especially if Adobe made a version of Illustrator for it, and someone offered a pen option!
I would only be interested in a bigger iPad if you could actually draw on it (with a proper stylus). If it had that, then the bigger the better, but otherwise there isn't any point to anything bigger than the current model.
Originally Posted by Gazoobee
I would only be interested in a bigger iPad if you could actually draw on it (with a proper stylus). If it had that, then the bigger the better, but otherwise there isn't any point to anything bigger than the current model.
You can do that with an iPad now.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee
I would only be interested in a bigger iPad if you could actually draw on it (with a proper stylus). If it had that, then the bigger the better, but otherwise there isn't any point to anything bigger than the current model.
Yes, as in the Cintiq (above)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
You can do that with an iPad now.
Yeah, but not really.
Originally Posted by paxman
Yeah, but not really.
It's an on/off question. It either supports it or it doesn't. You can certainly use one. As touchscreen tech advances, using one will be better in more situations, is all.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mac_128
However, Steve Jobs said a 7" tablet isn't useful for very many purposes unless you have sandpaper to file down your fingertips.
Dimensions for a 7" 16:9 and a 7.85" 4:3 screen.
16:9 7" - 6.10 * 3.43 = 20.923 sq in
4:3 7.85" - 6.28 * 4.71 = 29.5788 sq in
41.37% increase
Over 40% more surface area. Even if Steve meant exactly what he said, his opinion of 7" widescreen being a poor choice would not be relevant against something that had 40%+ more screen real estate. I've pointed this out on several threads about this topic.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
It's an on/off question. It either supports it or it doesn't. You can certainly use one. As touchscreen tech advances, using one will be better in more situations, is all.
Yes, there are usable styluses (styli?) that can be used on an iPad, and I know many artist do amazing things with one finger, but you'd have a hard time convincing many graphic artists or animators a finger or iPad type stylus is adequate.
Bottom line - a larger iPad would a professional tool and as such would need the specs to satisfy its target user.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SSquirrel
Dimensions for a 7" 16:9 and a 7.85" 4:3 screen.
16:9 7" - 6.10 * 3.43 = 20.923 sq in
4:3 7.85" - 6.28 * 4.71 = 29.5788 sq in
41.37% increase
Over 40% more surface area. Even if Steve meant exactly what he said, his opinion of 7" widescreen being a poor choice would not be relevant against something that had 40%+ more screen real estate. I've pointed this out on several threads about this topic.
Good point, and also, now, we have screens with much higher resolution than we did at the time the statement was made.
I also highlighted in this post how often Steve Jobs changed his public stance on a topic: http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/153072/purported-ipad-mini-parts-show-front-back-panels-lcd-nano-sim-tray/80#post_2203618
There is also a good article here: Shockingly, Steve Jobs wasn't against the idea of an iPad mini... : http://www.imore.com/shockingly-steve-jobs-wasnt-against-idea-ipad-mini
Here's the deal ... We have no idea if Jobs changed his mind on this matter before he died. Apple executives were indeed publicly encouraged to think for themselves. But what Jobs said on any given day can't simply be dismissed as "salesmanship" or chalked up to his reality distortion field to support a particular pundits position simply because Jobs was officially documented to have changed his mind on occasion. Much of what Apple is today is the direct result from Jobs guiding principles, right or wrong. And yes he's been known to change his mind. The point of dredging up Jobs statement about 7" tablets has more to do with guiding principles. This wasn't just Jobs opinion, it was the stated result of considerable experimentation and study by Apple. It's bigger than Jobs, and as if to hammer it home, Jobs made as big an issue out of it as he did Flash. He wasn't wrong about Flash, and I seriously doubt he would have, nor Apple will change their opinions about that, anymore than they will kiss and make up with Google. Likewise with the tablet.
Now that doesn't mean Apple can't make a 7" tablet, but it won't just be a scaled down iPad to compete with Google on their terms. It will be something that adheres not just to Jobs opinion, but to the studies that led to Jobs being able to make such a definitive statement, and to the underlying principles of Apple -- Jobs said many times that Apple wasn't interested in catering to the lowest common denominator unless they could do something significant in that space. Now that's not just an opinion of Jobs, but a corporate philosophy. I don't suggest Apple can't change its mind in that regard, but that's not the governing principles Apple has been traditionally based on, nor the actions investors or consumers have come to expect. So let's say that Apple starts making decisions that are the opposite of Jobs last statuted position on the subject ... They aren't just always reversing his opinion (which "he might have eventually done anyway"), they would be in some cases reversing ideologies that help make Apple what is today. And if that happens, what is Apple then, but just another electronics company.
Which means that if Apple ever wanted to produce a pro tablet with a pressure sensitive stylis, they would have to either:
a) license the tech from Wacom, or...
b) buy Wacom outright... which... at the moment would cost ~ $1B. Apple could hand over the Samsung judgement and call it even
Quote:
Originally Posted by SSquirrel
Dimensions for a 7" 16:9 and a 7.85" 4:3 screen.
16:9 7" - 6.10 * 3.43 = 20.923 sq in
4:3 7.85" - 6.28 * 4.71 = 29.5788 sq in
41.37% increase
Over 40% more surface area. Even if Steve meant exactly what he said, his opinion of 7" widescreen being a poor choice would not be relevant against something that had 40%+ more screen real estate. I've pointed this out on several threads about this topic.
but his comment was false in the face of people using several tens of millions of 3.5" devices quite happily. The size of the device is irrelevant compared to how the realestate is used.
The headline should say resolution not aspect ratio. There is a big difference.
The same aspect ratio but a different resolution would require developers to develop and test test against yet another form factor (iPhone classic, iPhone 4/retina, iPhone 5/tall, iPad classic, iPad/retina, iPad mini). That would suck for developers. Some stuff is automatic, some isn't. If nothing else developers would have to provide new full-screen images for theirs. Not a deal-breaker, but annoying (as we all found out as part of the iPhone 5 roll-out).
On the other hand, the same resolution makes this easy for developers (no work at all), but potentially introduce some usability issues for users. A touch-based user interface designed for a 10" screen doesn't necessarily work perfectly for a 7" screen (hence, Jobs' sharpening your fingertips comment). Everything will be just a little bit smaller, so things that were on the margin of "big enough to easily tap" might fall below that threshhold.
I expect/hope that Apple goes with the same resolution (as the article suggests). But I wouldn't be utterly surprised if they do something else.
All tablets can easily switch between portrait and landscape¡ It's especially easy on the MS Surface. All you have to do is exit Metro UI to the standard Windows UI, hover the mouse in the lower-lefthand corner to bring up the screen button to access Start, open Control Panel, open Appearance, open open Display Settings, click on Change Display Settings, Change the Orientation, hit Apply, wait several seconds and hope that the 50/50 guess was the right way because it has no sensor to tell what orientation it's currently in. It couldn't be easier¡
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
All tablets can easily switch between portrait and landscape¡ It's especially easy on the MS Surface. All you have to do is exit Metro UI to the standard Windows UI, hover the mouse in the lower-lefthand corner to bring up the screen button to access Start, open Control Panel, open Appearance, open open Display Settings, click on Change Display Settings, Change the Orientation, hit Apply, wait several seconds and hope that the 50/50 guess was the right way because it has no sensor to tell what orientation it's currently in. It couldn't be easier¡
... LOL Soli! What's scary about that is you might have accurately described it.
FWIW the Nexus 7 does fine in landscape mode. When used for reading it gives you 2 pages side-by-side similar to opening a book. Gmail works particularly well for me in landscape with the mailbox on the left and the opened mail shown on the right panel allowing me to quickly review and scroll. Perhaps not all Android tablets work the same? Dunno.
I opened up Win Server 2012 in VMWare to walk through it.
That said, that might have just been an issue with the Surface prototype The Verge demoed as I found this dated from a year ago...
Android does this satisfactory. I've never seen it transition as seamlessly or smoothly as in iOS but it does it correctly. My problem with the 16:9 tablets is that just aren't great for anything but a widescreen video. Reading simply isn't ideal on that aspect ratio with the 7-10" display. Too wide on one end and too narrow on the other.
Well before the iPad was ever announced I was saying that something around the ol' 4:3 aspect ratio would be ideal. I was laughed at because, as I was told repeatedly, "4:# is an obsolete aspect ratio." I think other tablet makers could have faired better if they copied Apple here. It's funny that we don't see people copying any of the things Apple can't possibly protect and that are key to their success in the industry: user experience.
Pointless query deleted.
Originally Posted by v5v
Why do you do that? It's just not possible that you really believe that, because someone who genuinely did would have to be so utterly cognitively impaired that they would be unable to function in society. Saying that you can draw on an iPad is like saying you can blow up a car with Pop Rocks. It's NOT black/white.
… Can you, or can you not, use a stylus on an iPad. That's the question here. You can. That's the answer here.
Heaven's sake.
Some tasks, while technically *possible* are simply not *practical* in real-world applications, and you KNOW that.
Because the device isn't really designed with a stylus in mind. Yet they can work just fine. Which was the question.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][
That makes sense. Of course it's the same aspect ratio as the full sized iPad!
Unlike Android tablets, iPads are made to be used both in portrait and in landscape.
16:9 on a tablet is not very useful for many purposes.
Android tablets are not made to be used in portrait and landscape? Can you support that statement with some facts?
Can you give some examples where 16:9 is not very useful?
I use portrait and landscape on my Android and it works great for both. I find I like the 16:9 ratio better than 4:3. The world has gone widescreen but Apple lags behind for some reason.
Quote:
Originally Posted by paxman
Totally with Andysol, here.
Completely.