A 13"or even Larger iPad would be a boon to field engineers and construction superintendents. Instead of lugging around a stack of drawings, often outdated, worn, or shrunk from E to B (or internationally A0 to A3) that end up with fonts less than 4 pt. we could have "pinch-to-zoom"flexibility all the time.
Think the airline pilots scenario times 1000!
Some people go by what the media is hyping. They watch ads, for which there are very little ads for computers, but lots of ads for smartphones and people see tablets as well. Most cell phone stores don't sell PCs.
So the perception is that they need a tablet and/or smartphone will do everything they need. That's what a lot of these cell phone stores are pitching. So a lot of people don't think they need something so "complicated". I've gone a year without a desktop, I used an iPad, and that worked. I've been using computers since 1977, and been the industry for a LONG time, so it is possible for someone to use a tablet and not have to even touch a computer for a year. It is possible. Plus, we have this weird economy. Lots of people don't have $1000 to $4000 for a computer, but they might have $400 to $600 for a tablet or smartphone that does essentially what their basic needs are which is:
Browsing, texting, email, watching YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, games, listening to music, reading a book (tablet/readers). Those are the most common uses of a smartphone/tablet and probably what most people that don't use computers for a living would need.
Henry Ford said no such thing. He said (paraphrasing) that if he asked his customers what they want they would say "Faster horses." That does NOT mean "ignore your customers because they are stupid." It means "Satisfy the customers' desires in ways they hadn't even imagined and you'll be successful."
Ford (and Jobs) heard what customers wanted and delivered it, and more. In Ford's case, he heard "faster" and delivered it, while also eliminating fatigue and hunger. In Apple's case, the request for "BIGGER!" really means "easier to read" and "less scrolling." It's up to them to solve that challenge, not ignore it.
I *think* I understand the point you're attempting to make in saying that. But the choice of phrase, in itself, rather destroys the point (which could arguably be true in some cases). Fair warning: whatever it is that you actually mean, do not enroll in a business class and utter those words aloud - unless you enjoy groups of people giving you that wait... what?! look.
But anyway, if there is real market demand for larger screen, premium priced mobile computing devices (and there does seem to be), and a satisfactory profit can be made meeting that demand, which attacks the competition more than it cannibalizes your existing product line, then one should not wholly dismiss the concept, if the dismissal is just based on philosophical grounds. If Apple has technological reasons for not going in this direction, then that is one thing. But refusing to offer what the market is demanding (and seems willing to pay for) based on product ideology, is just a quick way to become the next BlackBerry, Nokia... or Microsoft.