Yes, and you can hold a bucket of sand with your hands too, but it's not a pleasant experience. This thing will be too big and too heavy. Not happening. If Apple does release a 13" iOS device it won't be designed to be held in your hands; it won't be an iPad Pro.
I wasn't a fan of his snark, but your question about how to hold it prompted an interesting thought. I own the iPad air...we all know it's extremely light. One pound. I'm not well versed in technology, but I'd imagine if one cut the iPad Air in half and added that half to a complete iPad Air, you'd end up with a device that is, in fact, bigger than a hypothetical 13inch device, weighing exactly 1 ounce more than the iPad fourth generation (which weighs 20 ounces, I believe). It definitely seems as though a thirteen inch iPad could be made to be lighter than the fourth generation. Not too shabby. And that's just year one. (Edited weight).
Call me crazy, Island, but I actually had done the math.
The area of a 4:3 device is 4/7 times the square of the diagonal measurement. So, a 13" device is approximately 1.69 times larger in area than a 10" device. I assumed that some components would remain the same weight in the 13" device as a 10" device, plus some general improvements in weight savings.
I had done "some" of the math* as well and basically came to the same conclusion as you... but I just wanted to see what you'd have to say... and now I see that Joelsalt has weighed in on this as well.
Call me crazy, Island, but I actually had done the math.
The area of a 4:3 device is 4/7 times the square of the diagonal measurement. So, a 13" device is approximately 1.69 times larger in area than a 10" device. I assumed that some components would remain the same weight in the 13" device as a 10" device, plus some general improvements in weight savings.
Ah, nice. I hadn't thought it all the way through. Still...lighter than it sounds.
Using these numbers you'd get a iPad "Pro" at 13.9 inches (width) for 1.369 pounds.
A 9.7" screen is 45 sq inches.
A 12.9" screen is 80 sq inches.
That is 80/45 or 1.8 times larger.
You likely also have to increase the thickness because the device will get too flexible in your hand to feel flimsy/cheap, so the the third dimension also comes into it.
But lets just call the thickness increase to maintain rigidity a wash, with some incidentals that don't increase.
1.8*469 grams
= 1.86 lbs
Though kind of moot. 13" is big unwieldy package that just does't make sense as presented thus far. 13" turns it more into a desk device.
I was surprised (as were others I think) that the new iPad Air still had an A7. Not because it doesn't have enough performance, but because Apple has been making X versions for higher resolution devices.
The 6 Series PowerVR inside the A7 is much faster than the 5 Series used in the A6X. If you look at Imaginations information it's several times faster than the 5 Series. Yet the A7's graphics performance is only slightly better than the A6X.
I think the 6 Series GPU has been intentionally underclocked in the A7 to conserve battery life. and is actually capable of much higher performance. So if they do make a UHD device, all they need to do is run the GPU's at their normal operating frequencies.
I’ve been saying this since 2008. It’s not that hard to see where Apple’s headed. I’ve known they would kill off their laptops since before the iPad was even released.
Originally Posted by AjbDtc826
Touchscreen MacBook?
Never.
Originally Posted by waldobushman
What is a 12.9 inch iPad going to be better than?
The 9.7” iPad. And the 7.9” iPad.
Originally Posted by Ireland
2. How do you hold a 13" iPad?
Very carefully.
Originally Posted by RegurgitatedCoprolite
"%uF8FF" was supposed to be the Apple logo.
Option+Shift+K should do it. I’ve never understood how Windows users think memorizing Unicode commands is in any way acceptable.
?
Originally Posted by NeilM
12.9” iPad? Too big. Too heavy. Too awkward. Too unbelievable.
7.9” iPad? Too small, too cramped, too stupid, too unusable.
Amazing. Everyone was saying Apple was doomed for not making a smaller, cheaper iPad, then Apple is doomed if they don't release a mini with Retina Display, and now Apple is doomed of they don't make a larger, heavier one that runs Mac OS and have a pen (ala Surface RT)? Is Apple always doomed if they don't do whatever their competitors are doing?
I was surprised (as were others I think) that the new iPad Air still had an A7. Not because it doesn't have enough performance, but because Apple has been making X versions for higher resolution devices.
But there is no such thing as an A7X. It makes no sense to talk about desiring a nonexistent CPU. On what basis do you want a nonexistent CPU? Its imaginary performance? That's like saying you were surprised the MacBook Pro didn't use the nonexistent intel Core i9 because it would have beaten the i7 in an imaginary benchmark.
What will it be called, iPad Pro? BTW, Korean rumor? Next thing you will see is Galaxy Pad Pro 13", yup. Scamsung reponds to rumor well and release shitty products to be the first on market. Beat Apple to that.
Fascinating. Humans are programmed to expect patterns. I supposed that explains how agriculture was invented. Patterned thinking led to fulfilling basic needs when your species was young. This makes sense. We rarely get to probe your neuropsychology during abductions. There usually isn't enough time.
There's rumor about 13" iPad. No rumor for A7x so far.
So we can talk about imaginary iPad since someone made up a rumor, but we can't talk about what might be powering it, because no one has yet made up a rumor about that?
A 12.9 inch iPad with a regular Retina resolution of 2048 x 1536 will have 198-200 ppi. Doubling up to the next level, 4096 x 3072, battery power, GPU and thermal envelope permitting, means 396-400 ppi. Not outside the realm of possibility.
The pricetag could have a big number on it, but I am sure there would be a market for an iPad Pro. I am thinking medical imaging/scans for physicians, other industrial and scientific high-resolution imaging needs. Pricetag, small objection.
Fascinating. Humans are programmed to expect patterns. I supposed that explains how agriculture was invented. Patterned thinking led to fulfilling basic needs when your species was young. This makes sense. We rarely get to probe your neuropsychology during abductions. There usually isn't enough time.
You would have more time if you could reduce the time you spend on anal probes.
But there is no such thing as an A7X. It makes no sense to talk about desiring a nonexistent CPU. On what basis do you want a nonexistent CPU? Its imaginary performance? That's like saying you were surprised the MacBook Pro didn't use the nonexistent intel Core i9 because it would have beaten the i7 in an imaginary benchmark.
Perhaps you'd like to explain why the GPU in the A7 is grossly under performing? Not when compared to other SoC's on the market (which is easily beats) but when compared to the previous 5 Series? Only thing I can think of is Apple hasn't yet "activated" the full performance capabilities of the 6 Series either by underclocking or even having unused cores.
Comments
Yes, and you can hold a bucket of sand with your hands too, but it's not a pleasant experience. This thing will be too big and too heavy. Not happening. If Apple does release a 13" iOS device it won't be designed to be held in your hands; it won't be an iPad Pro.
I wasn't a fan of his snark, but your question about how to hold it prompted an interesting thought. I own the iPad air...we all know it's extremely light. One pound. I'm not well versed in technology, but I'd imagine if one cut the iPad Air in half and added that half to a complete iPad Air, you'd end up with a device that is, in fact, bigger than a hypothetical 13inch device, weighing exactly 1 ounce more than the iPad fourth generation (which weighs 20 ounces, I believe). It definitely seems as though a thirteen inch iPad could be made to be lighter than the fourth generation. Not too shabby. And that's just year one. (Edited weight).
http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/160799/rumor-supplier-now-building-12-9-inch-apple-ipad-displays-for-early-2014-launch/40#post_2437136
Call me crazy, Island, but I actually had done the math.
The area of a 4:3 device is 4/7 times the square of the diagonal measurement. So, a 13" device is approximately 1.69 times larger in area than a 10" device. I assumed that some components would remain the same weight in the 13" device as a 10" device, plus some general improvements in weight savings.
I had done "some" of the math* as well and basically came to the same conclusion as you... but I just wanted to see what you'd have to say... and now I see that Joelsalt has weighed in on this as well.
* my slide rule is broken
http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/160799/rumor-supplier-now-building-12-9-inch-apple-ipad-displays-for-early-2014-launch/40#post_2437136
Call me crazy, Island, but I actually had done the math.
The area of a 4:3 device is 4/7 times the square of the diagonal measurement. So, a 13" device is approximately 1.69 times larger in area than a 10" device. I assumed that some components would remain the same weight in the 13" device as a 10" device, plus some general improvements in weight savings.
Ah, nice. I hadn't thought it all the way through. Still...lighter than it sounds.
Using these numbers you'd get a iPad "Pro" at 13.9 inches (width) for 1.369 pounds.
A 9.7" screen is 45 sq inches.
A 12.9" screen is 80 sq inches.
That is 80/45 or 1.8 times larger.
You likely also have to increase the thickness because the device will get too flexible in your hand to feel flimsy/cheap, so the the third dimension also comes into it.
But lets just call the thickness increase to maintain rigidity a wash, with some incidentals that don't increase.
1.8*469 grams
= 1.86 lbs
Though kind of moot. 13" is big unwieldy package that just does't make sense as presented thus far. 13" turns it more into a desk device.
There will NOT be a 13" ipad in the next 2 years.
A7X anyone?
I was surprised (as were others I think) that the new iPad Air still had an A7. Not because it doesn't have enough performance, but because Apple has been making X versions for higher resolution devices.
The 6 Series PowerVR inside the A7 is much faster than the 5 Series used in the A6X. If you look at Imaginations information it's several times faster than the 5 Series. Yet the A7's graphics performance is only slightly better than the A6X.
I think the 6 Series GPU has been intentionally underclocked in the A7 to conserve battery life. and is actually capable of much higher performance. So if they do make a UHD device, all they need to do is run the GPU's at their normal operating frequencies.
I’ve been saying this since 2008. It’s not that hard to see where Apple’s headed. I’ve known they would kill off their laptops since before the iPad was even released.
Never.
The 9.7” iPad. And the 7.9” iPad.
Very carefully.
Option+Shift+K should do it. I’ve never understood how Windows users think memorizing Unicode commands is in any way acceptable.
?
12.9” iPad? Too big. Too heavy. Too awkward. Too unbelievable.
7.9” iPad? Too small, too cramped, too stupid, too unusable.
I wasn’t wrong. Hopefully you’ll be.
I wasn’t wrong. Hopefully you’ll be.
From where I sit, you were very wrong on the Mini. You assume your personal taste is somehow reflected in greater reality, when it isn't.
Old Mini sales were reportedly dead even with iPad 4 and it was still low res, running on a A5.
The new Retina Mini would likely be Apples sales star if not for muted, later launch and supply constraints.
But there is no such thing as an A7X. It makes no sense to talk about desiring a nonexistent CPU. On what basis do you want a nonexistent CPU? Its imaginary performance? That's like saying you were surprised the MacBook Pro didn't use the nonexistent intel Core i9 because it would have beaten the i7 in an imaginary benchmark.
But there is no such thing as an A7X. It makes no sense to talk about desiring a nonexistent CPU.
There is no such thing as a 13" iPad either. Imaginary products may as well include imaginary SoCs.
What will it be called, iPad Pro? BTW, Korean rumor? Next thing you will see is Galaxy Pad Pro 13", yup. Scamsung reponds to rumor well and release shitty products to be the first on market. Beat Apple to that.
There is no such thing as a 13" iPad either. Imaginary products may as well include imaginary SoCs.
There's rumor about 13" iPad. No rumor for A7x so far.
13 inch Retina screen
A7X
4GB ram
Touch ID
$649
And triple boots: iOS, Android and Windows 8...lol
Fascinating. Humans are programmed to expect patterns. I supposed that explains how agriculture was invented. Patterned thinking led to fulfilling basic needs when your species was young. This makes sense. We rarely get to probe your neuropsychology during abductions. There usually isn't enough time.
There's rumor about 13" iPad. No rumor for A7x so far.
So we can talk about imaginary iPad since someone made up a rumor, but we can't talk about what might be powering it, because no one has yet made up a rumor about that?
The pricetag could have a big number on it, but I am sure there would be a market for an iPad Pro. I am thinking medical imaging/scans for physicians, other industrial and scientific high-resolution imaging needs. Pricetag, small objection.
Maybe in combination with some kind of improved virtual keyboard tech that makes possible greater typing accuracy? tactile feedback of some kind?
You would have more time if you could reduce the time you spend on anal probes.
But there is no such thing as an A7X. It makes no sense to talk about desiring a nonexistent CPU. On what basis do you want a nonexistent CPU? Its imaginary performance? That's like saying you were surprised the MacBook Pro didn't use the nonexistent intel Core i9 because it would have beaten the i7 in an imaginary benchmark.
Perhaps you'd like to explain why the GPU in the A7 is grossly under performing? Not when compared to other SoC's on the market (which is easily beats) but when compared to the previous 5 Series? Only thing I can think of is Apple hasn't yet "activated" the full performance capabilities of the 6 Series either by underclocking or even having unused cores.