Rumor: Apple's "iPad Pro" to be as thin as an iPhone, sport 12.2-inch display & extra speakers

189101113

Comments

  • Reply 241 of 261
    Marvin wrote: »
    But the fact that Swift * is written in Swift says it all.

    * and in the future, the OS X, iOS and Server Operating Systems ...

    The Swift library of functions is written in Swift at least, I didn't see details of the Swift runtime/interpreter/compiler. I doubt they'd transition a whole OS over but it depends on the benefits. If there was a 10-20% performance hit but the code ended up being significantly smaller making up some of the performance loss and the rest with embedded C code, there's a possibility. Quite a lot of work if it was just for the sake of it. Even though it doesn't support C++, if there's a quick translation app to convert C++ code into Swift this can work out ok. I'd at least like Applescript to be deprecated in favor of Swift and have a migration in XCode from one to the other. Switching Automator over would be nice too. If they had something like this, you could batch actions externally to apps more easily e.g batch actions on images using Photoshop, Pixelmator etc.

    The AppleScript/Automator idea is brilliant -- count me in!

    The optimization for compact code tradeoff for performance is interesting ...

    I suspect that the Apple Watch S1 Chip will run a version of iOS -- so compact code would be desirable. I don't believe that there would be any embedded C code, as Swift is designed to be as efficient as C and outperform it.

    Consider: The guy who is responsible for implementing llvm/clang, responsible for Xcode Tools, etc. -- is Chris Lattner -- the guy who designed Swift.


    Also, I've been thinking a lot about this ...

    Initially, the Apple Watch will use your iPhone as an accessory to access data from the Internet and iCloud.

    Typically, this data is passed as HTML, JSON or XML. All of these are verbose (typically 35-70 tag/format overhead) and need to be parsed at the receiving end (memory and processor intensive).

    Then, once the data is parsed, it must be formatted for display. Typically, on an iDevice, this involves:
    • a View Controller
    • a Scroll View
    • a View
    • a TableView
    • some table cells
    • some datasource code to fill in and format the data
    • some delegate code to respond to user interactions with the data

    Take the case of a simple list of, say, the birthdays of immediate family members:

    10/14 Braden
    06/15 Jason
    01/28 Marlowe
    12/04 Patti
    02/24 Standish


    Pretty simple stuff ... or is it -- considering all the overhead to access and present the data ...

    The list above takes 84 characters (bytes) including a carriage return after each line. If we're using HTML, JSON, or XML the data size would be easily 2X - 5X -- and it must be read [stored], parsed [stored again], formatted for presentation [stored again] ...

    And, and ... it gobbles up your battery and cell data allottment!

    It's bad enough doing it on the iPhone ... but on the Apple Watch???

    The iPhone will use BLE or WiFi packets to pass data to the Apple Watch -- it is crucial that this be efficient as possible.

    Look at our list of 84 characters -- it doesn't get much more efficient than that!

    So, if the Apple Watch asks the iPhone to get a list from your family birthday calendar on iCloud -- the app in iCloud could send the formatted data as it is to be displayed on the Apple Watch -- a list of 84 characters.

    There's no encoding, parsing, storing, reformatting -- it is just passed as-is -- a list of 84 characters. (possibly, the data might be encrypted/decrypted).


    What I am suggesting, here is a level of encapsulation of the data specifically targeted to the format and device on which it will be displayed.

    Then, when Apple Watch 2 gets its own cell and GPS radios -- it can connect to the outside world as efficiently as possible!
  • Reply 242 of 261
    -
  • Reply 243 of 261
    Won't it resemble a "giant iPad Air 2?" Why would it resemble a giant iPad 2? Typo?
  • Reply 244 of 261
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by cdarlington1 View Post

    Won't it resemble a "giant iPad Air 2?" Why would it resemble a giant iPad 2? Typo?

     

    It will actually resemble a giant iPhone 6, without the phone capability.
  • Reply 245 of 261
    Originally Posted by gimarbazat View Post

    It will actually resemble a giant iPhone 6, without the phone capability.



    That’s a decent point; should something that big be 16:9? I don’t think so. I’d have to mock it up. Where’m I going to get that much cardboard...

  • Reply 246 of 261
    relicrelic Posts: 4,735member
    Quote:



    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

     



    That’s a decent point; should something that big be 16:9? I don’t think so. I’d have to mock it up. Where’m I going to get that much cardboard...


     

    I couldn't imagine having a different aspect ratio other than the 15:10 (3840 x 2560) on my Panasonic 20" ToughPad, the 3:2 (2160 x 1440) that my Surface Pro 3 has, the 4:3 that both my iPad Air 2 and Nexux 9 (2048 x 1536) rocks or last but not least the 16:9 (1920 x 1080) that my Nokia 2520 utilizes, as there is no such thing as the perfect aspect ration, it all comes down to what your going to be using the device for more and than compromise on the rest. For example, the iPad Air 2 and Nexus 9 don't make for a very good portable Kino but their great at surfing and reading magazines, eBooks, etc., where as the Nokia 2520 makes for a great portable Kino but not so great eBook or Magazine reader. 

  • Reply 247 of 261
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


    That’s a decent point; should something that big be 16:9? I don’t think so. I’d have to mock it up. Where’m I going to get that much cardboard...

     

    yes the only big difference is the aspect ratio. 16:9 on the iPhone is actually better than 4:3 on the iPad.
  • Reply 248 of 261
    Originally Posted by gimarbazat View Post

    16:9 on the iPhone is actually better than 4:3 on the iPad.

     

    Well, it’s better... on the iPhone. The size and use case of the device makes all the difference.

  • Reply 249 of 261
    relicrelic Posts: 4,735member
    gimarbazat wrote: »
    <div class="quote-container" data-huddler-embed="/t/183188/rumor-apples-ipad-pro-to-be-as-thin-as-an-iphone-sport-12-2-inch-display-extra-speakers/240#post_2637222" data-huddler-embed-placeholder="false"><span>Quote:</span><div class="quote-block">Originally Posted by <strong>Tallest Skil</strong> <a href="/t/183188/rumor-apples-ipad-pro-to-be-as-thin-as-an-iphone-sport-12-2-inch-display-extra-speakers/240#post_2637222"><img src="/img/forum/go_quote.gif" class="inlineimg" alt="View Post"/></a><br/><br/><p><br>That’s a decent point; should something that big be 16:9? I don’t think so. I’d have to mock it up. Where’m I going to get that much cardboard...</p></div></div><p> </p>

    yes the only big difference is the aspect ratio. 16:9 on the iPhone is actually better than 4:3 on the iPad.

    It's better for you, after using a 1:1 aspect ratio on my BlackBerry Passport I love it, websites, e-books, Docs, etc. look amazing. I also really enjoy the 4:3 on my iPad for the same reason. Then their is my Nokia 2520, a Windows RT tablet with a 16:9 aspect ratio that works great with MS Office and surfing in landscape, also watching movies is a real joy, in fact it's my main portable Kino because of the 16:9 aspect ratio, that and it has a HDMI out so I can connect my portable projector.

    Like I said above, there really isn't the perfect aspect ratio, it depends on what you will be doing on your device.
  • Reply 250 of 261
    Quote:



    Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post



    It's all about the software. A 12.2 "pro" device needs better software than the current iOS for iPad.

    A 12.2" "pro" device deserves OSX and not iOS

  • Reply 251 of 261
    Originally Posted by Go Faster View Post

    A 12.2" "pro" device deserves OSX and not iOS



    Not if it’s a touchscreen.

  • Reply 252 of 261
    chiachia Posts: 713member
    go faster wrote: »
    A 12.2" "pro" device deserves OSX and not iOS
    Such a device already exists, the ModBooks.
    I believe if Apple felt such a market was worthwhile it would have already bought the company that makes ModBooks.
  • Reply 253 of 261
    chiachia Posts: 713member
    relic wrote: »
    - my BlackBerry Passport
    - my iPad
    - my Nokia 2520,
    - Windows RT tablet with a 16:9 aspect ratio - - my Surface 3.

    Your list of devices inadvertently highlights the failure of the Microsoft Surface to be an ideal device serving the best of both worlds.

    If it were so great at being a tablet and so great at being a laptop then you wouldn't need all these other devices you mention.
  • Reply 254 of 261
    relicrelic Posts: 4,735member

    Poo

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by ChiA View Post





    Your list of devices inadvertently highlights the failure of the Microsoft Surface to be an ideal device serving the best of both worlds.



    If it were so great at being a tablet and so great at being a laptop then you wouldn't need all these other devices you mention.

     

    Nice try, but by now you know that I'm a gadget fan and would own multiple devices regardless. I'm not looking for the ultimate device anyway, it's a fools errand as it will never exist for me.

  • Reply 255 of 261
    MarvinMarvin Posts: 15,273moderator
    chia wrote: »
    go faster wrote: »
    A 12.2" "pro" device deserves OSX and not iOS
    Such a device already exists, the ModBooks.
    I believe if Apple felt such a market was worthwhile it would have already bought the company that makes ModBooks.

    If the potential market size is so low that it makes more sense to let 3rd parties handle it then that's the most likely route for Apple, although they make some exceptions. Tim mentioned the Mac Pro in his recent interview saying it was a low volume product but they chose to keep making it for creative customers. The ModBook looks good enough for drawing with:


    [VIDEO]


    but they replaced the display with a low quality panel and when you need to type, you have to prop it up anyway.

    I'd personally like to see the MBP base made into a touch surface. Flattening the keyboard might not appeal to everyone but there's huge potential for contextual controls. Think of the 3 volume buttons, those would be replaced by having the speakers touch-sensitive and you'd just swipe up and down to raise/lower the volume and they can light up like the sleep light with bars to show how loud the sound is. Mute would be tapping the bottom of the speaker. They can't be covered in glass of course as it would dull the sound but the main area in the middle could be glass that is sunk in.

    It would feel like the trackpad surface but extend all the way over the surface. They have just one button for the power and this would also act as an override so that no matter what contextual controls were on the touch surface, just touching that button would revert it back to the keyboard view.

    You'd be able to finger paint very easily with it being smooth glass but you'd also be able to run a passive stick over it and get very precise drawing with complete palm rejection. HP has been trying out some crazy input methods but they did it vertically here, which is pointless:


    [VIDEO]


    Their setup here is much better:


    [VIDEO]


    That uses a projector to put imagery onto a touch surface. That's pretty neat but it requires a fixed camera above, which isn't feasible in a laptop and a second display would waste a lot of battery. If you look at the perforated speaker holes, there's about 40 holes or so. The 15" laptop's native resolution is 1440 x 900 and realistically they can only fit about 8 width-wise so 320 pixels wide. They can quadruple that to get close to the same resolution as the display. They can illuminate it from behind and block the light with e-ink. The tricky part here is making sure it works well in bright light but they can always make a slim keyboard plate that can be stuck into that area with magnets that allows you type in really bright light. E-ink is perfectly visible in bright light so there's a solution that would work ok. Perhaps they just make a high-res e-ink layer above the metal and below the glass surface.

    If they can make that layer flex at multiple points by a tiny amount so that it can click, that would be good for keeping the trackpad functionality as well as pressure sensitivity. There can be tiny pads all under the e-ink display suspending it and only if the pads are pressed at a certain strength does it make a click. It would be good if they made the zooming like iOS too so that it doesn't go fuzzy.

    They can also go at it very casually and just get rid of the function key row (move escape next to the 1-key) and have the front portion turned into a gesture area like that at first and the number row would have f-key modifiers.

    Like this:

    1000

    The power button can go back to the old style or maybe even double as the escape key. It can be fn-escape for standby.

    The speaker touch replaces volume controls, exposé etc are gestures, music would be a small touch graphic somewhere. That lower panel would be displaying graphics, either black e-ink outlines or illuminated outlines. This can handle display brightness controls too. The number row is the function-keys using fn.
  • Reply 256 of 261
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Go Faster View Post

    A 12.2" "pro" device deserves OSX and not iOS

     

    Amen!
  • Reply 257 of 261
    jfc1138jfc1138 Posts: 3,090member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by gimarbazat View Post

     
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Go Faster View Post

     

    A 12.2" "pro" device deserves OSX and not iOS


     




    Amen!



    OS X requires a keyboard. iPads don't sell with a keyboard.

  • Reply 258 of 261
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by jfc1138 View Post

     
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by gimarbazat View Post

     
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Go Faster View Post

     

    A 12.2" "pro" device deserves OSX and not iOS


     




    Amen!



    OS X requires a keyboard. iPads don't sell with a keyboard.


     

     

    Yeah, they do. It’s built-in.

  • Reply 259 of 261
    jfc1138jfc1138 Posts: 3,090member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Benjamin Frost View Post

     

     

     

    Yeah, they do. It’s built-in.




    Hah! Good point, the virtual keyboard. So there'd just need to be a toggle to get it to pop up as needed?

  • Reply 260 of 261
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by jfc1138 View Post

     
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Benjamin Frost View Post

     

     

     

    Yeah, they do. It’s built-in.




    Hah! Good point, the virtual keyboard. So there'd just need to be a toggle to get it to pop up as needed?


     

     

    You just tap the screen where you want to write, and the keyboard does, indeed, pop up.

Sign In or Register to comment.