CDMA iPhone, AMD-powered Apple TV with iOS, 7-inch iPad rumored

2456711

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 207
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by cvaldes1831 View Post


    Different needs for different people. Your individual usage case isn't the only valid one; you are not the center of the universe. If Apple feels there is a large enough market for a smaller iPad, it is likely they will pursue it.



    Plus, the smaller iPad would likely be cheaper. It has been widely reported that price has been a big barrier to iPad adoption.



    There's a barrier to iPad adoption?
  • Reply 22 of 207
    firefly7475firefly7475 Posts: 1,502member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by GaspinRasputin View Post


    I don't understand the need for a smaller iPad...



    If they can deliver it for significantly less than the 10" version then think of how it could be used for specific tasks rather than an all-in-one device. (i.e. an alarm clock, digital photo frame, children's learning device, in-car entertainment/GPS etc)
  • Reply 23 of 207
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Carmissimo View Post


    Thee's a barrier to iPad adoption?



    Yes... Apple was unable to get 12 people in Boise, ID to buy one.
  • Reply 24 of 207
    firefly7475firefly7475 Posts: 1,502member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Joe hs View Post


    How exactly would iOS work on apple TV? It's a completely different category of device to iPhone, iPod Touch & iPad.



    With a Wiimote clone.



    Think about it. It would work.
  • Reply 25 of 207
    chronsterchronster Posts: 1,894member
    CDMA iPhone? Well that's a new one...
  • Reply 26 of 207
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Wiggin View Post


    Which is why I think it' more likely a larger touch than a smaller iPad. There would be a few fewer issues with sizing up the interface than scaling it down (and making elements too small to interact with).



    I don't agree with this sentiment. If Apple were to decrease the size of the iPhone screen from 3.5" to 3", then yes you would run into UI problems. But with a product like the iPad, going from 9.7" down to 7" (or somewhere in between) would not be that problematic, IMO. I feel it would only make the experience better. Keep the same number of pixels so you retain the same resolution- only, it now looks better because you have the same picture on a screen that is (at most) 2.7" smaller. IMO, the iPad in its current size has lots of unused graphical space. That, and I think Apple needs to work on the bezel. If they don't decrease the size of the screen, at least slim up the bezel so that the device isn't as physically wide/tall. I think a lot of the "bulkiness" complaints stem from this.
  • Reply 27 of 207
    asciiascii Posts: 5,941member
    A device operated by remote control is different to both mouse and touchscreen. So it would be a 3rd type of GUI. Unless the magic trackpad is intended for use with the new Apple TV?
  • Reply 28 of 207
    antkm1antkm1 Posts: 1,441member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jbro1999 View Post


    lighter, easier to hold and read books.



    If it's cheaper its something I would buy.



    i'd rather see a lighter weight 9.7" iPad instead of a smaller screen. After experiencing the iPad, I found that it's still too heavy to use for longer than 1 hour of continuous use.



    my household just purchased a Nook and I'd have to say it's lighter weight is a huge plus, if you just compare the weight only.
  • Reply 29 of 207
    joe hsjoe hs Posts: 488member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Firefly7475 View Post


    If they can deliver it for significantly less than the 10" version then think of how it could be used for specific tasks rather than an all-in-one device. (i.e. an alarm clock, digital photo frame, children's learning device, in-car entertainment/GPS etc)



    Significantly cheaper than $499, but more expensive than $199?

    $299 to $399 is the only viable option and that might start to canibilise iPod Touch sales at $199, $299 & $399
  • Reply 30 of 207
    nkhmnkhm Posts: 928member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by GaspinRasputin View Post


    I don't understand the need for a smaller iPad...



    What's your point? Many people couldn't see the need for an iPad at all. Handbag size media consumption device and you can't see the market for this? Seriously?
  • Reply 31 of 207
    nkhmnkhm Posts: 928member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by antkm1 View Post


    i'd rather see a lighter weight 9.7" iPad instead of a smaller screen. After experiencing the iPad, I found that it's still too heavy to use for longer than 1 hour of continuous use.



    my household just purchased a Nook and I'd have to say it's lighter weight is a huge plus, if you just compare the weight only.



    Sorry - that sounds ridiculous. I can use a laptop, on my lap for more than an hour, so why on EARTH can't you cope with a tablet which ways less than a third of a standard laptop? Get down the gym.
  • Reply 32 of 207
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by crawdad62 View Post


    Don't see it and yes I know I'm not the center of the universe. Smaller cheaper? iPod Touch comes to mind. Just doesn't seem like there's a whole lot gained or lost whichever is the case by a 7" model that isn't already met by the iPod Touch or the iPad at its current configuration.



    I am an exception, I guess. I don't like the current iPad form factor. It is more like the Kindle DX. I would much rather prefer a Kindle sized iPad. It would also be far lighter, and far easier to use while traveling in the subway.



    And it will also be a lot cheaper.
  • Reply 33 of 207
    antkm1antkm1 Posts: 1,441member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by cvaldes1831 View Post


    Plus, the smaller iPad would likely be cheaper. It has been widely reported that price has been a big barrier to iPad adoption.



    my hope would be that the next iPad (9.7" model) will start at a lower price. I agree, however i haven't seen data to back it up, that price is a big barrier. For me, weight, price and the inability to comfortably use the device hands-free in my lap are the biggest barriers for purchasing. if they made a 7" iPad that complied with all these, I still don't think i'd purchase one. 9.7" is just about as small as i'd go on screen size, unless i'm only looking to read books. Then, by that matter, i'd just buy the Nook, which we already have one.
  • Reply 34 of 207
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by iReality85 View Post


    I don't agree with this sentiment. If Apple were to decrease the size of the iPhone screen from 3.5" to 3", then yes you would run into UI problems. But with a product like the iPad, going from 9.7" down to 7" (or somewhere in between) would not be that problematic, IMO. I feel it would only make the experience better. Keep the same number of pixels so you retain the same resolution- only, it now looks better because you have the same picture on a screen that is (at most) 2.7" smaller. IMO, the iPad in its current size has lots of unused graphical space. That, and I think Apple needs to work on the bezel. If they don't decrease the size of the screen, at least slim up the bezel so that the device isn't as physically wide/tall. I think a lot of the "bulkiness" complaints stem from this.



    While I agree with the rest of your post, gotta strongly disagree with the slimming of the Bezel.



    As Gruber has pointed out several times, if you slim the bezel, how do you hold the iPad without touching and covering the screen?



    The Bezel is as thick as it is for a good reason.
  • Reply 35 of 207
    antkm1antkm1 Posts: 1,441member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by nkhm View Post


    Sorry - that sounds ridiculous. I can use a laptop, on my lap for more than an hour, so why on EARTH can't you cope with a tablet which ways less than a third of a standard laptop? Get down the gym.



    that's because you don't have to hold and type with your lap-top in your hands for an given period of time...your argument is mute.
  • Reply 36 of 207
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Joe hs View Post


    Significantly cheaper than $499, but more expensive than $199?

    $299 to $399 is the only viable option and that might start to canibilise iPod Touch sales at $199, $299 & $399



    Which is why it's unlikely that Apple would keep the Touch with the current size and bring out a 7" iPad. If Apple decides that a smaller touchscreen device is needed than the current iPad, I think they'd sooner bring out one device, probably still call it the Touch, and not have two similarly priced devices filling a similar niche.



    Right now the Touch and the iPad perform many of the same functions though the Touch compromises screen real estate for portability. The question is, does Apple have the formula right?



    In the case of the iPad, I'd say yes, provided they can get the weight down in future versions. In the case of the Touch, not so much.
  • Reply 37 of 207
    kotatsukotatsu Posts: 1,010member
    With gaming so profitable and successful on the iPhone and iPad, I wonder if this new AMD chip will be for gaming? Are we talking Wii level performance or higher? I can't imagine it would be anywhere near 360 or PS3 level, but then again, those systems are 5 years old now. Anyone have any stats on the AMD chip?



    As for iOS on the big screen, it makes a lot of sense, but only with properly retooled apps. When paired with a motion sensing Wiimote style controller a lot of games would work pretty well, leaving the touch screen ones off limits unless more significantly reworked. Combine it with a cable killing subscription plan (admittedly, this would be something of an epic achievement if anyone pulled it off), and you'd have a pretty compelling box.
  • Reply 38 of 207
    nkhmnkhm Posts: 928member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by antkm1 View Post


    that's because you don't have to hold and type with your lap-top in your hands for an given period of time...your argument is mute.



    Not sure how you're holding your iPad, mine sits in my lap, i type with two hands with the pad supported in my lap, or on the arm of my sofa. Think you're doing something wrong there - go mute your own argument. Also, who does significant amounts of typing on an iPad - i read for 3 - 4 hours in an evening, check my email, listen to music and keep a check on facebook, no issue. Smaller would fit in my partners handbag, she'd grab one in a second.
  • Reply 39 of 207
    nvidia2008nvidia2008 Posts: 9,262member
    Funny, just a few hours ago today, I was thinking of posting a poll about who thought Apple was "secretly" compiling iOS for x86. But as someone mentioned, iOS and OS X share so much in common, I'm sure there's R&D going both ways:



    iOS on ARM

    iOS on x86

    OSX on ARM

    OSX on x86
  • Reply 40 of 207
    antkm1antkm1 Posts: 1,441member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by iLikeBananas View Post


    Why do you think the kindle is doing so well . a 6 inch would be better.



    the kindle is doing well because it's about 1/3 the cost of the iPad and it's marketed properly to the right people. It's truly meant to only read books, listen to audio and very light internet/email. It's not a very good comparison.
Sign In or Register to comment.