Except that they don't sell apps like iWork for the iPod touch. The iPad is a viable general purpose computer. The iPhone and touch are not.
Re-word your post dude.
ipad is a great computer.
ipod touch and iphone ares still viable computers .
The IPOD touch has 10,000 times more computing power compared to the computer that was on the apollo 13 space craft to the moon ... I sentence you to the ZUNE store !!!
His comments are even more applicable to a 3.2 inch screen than a 7 inch screen. That is the point he wishes people would overlook.
Actually, no their not.
The controls and text on the small iPhone screen are small but usable-- even for people with fat fingers (like me).
When you write an app for the iPad, you increase the size of things slightly -- to make the controls easier to touch, farther apart and text easier to read. The iPad has about 4x the real estate as the iPhone-- but you don't make things 4x larger. Rather, you put more information on the screen and/or make it more pleasing to the eye.
Conversely, in another post, I discuss why you can't easily downsize an app from a larger screen to a smaller screen -- you need to rethink the application.
You might be able to implement the iTunes multi-column UI on an iPad (barely). I don't think it would work on a 7" screen -- certainly not on an iPhone screen.
If you have designed an app for the small iPhone screen it will scale up 2x on the iPad screen. Most apps look ugly -- bigger but ugly, with a lot of wasted space! The controls are too big, the text is too big -- lots of jaggies because no anti-aliasing.
There are exceptions, but you usually have to rethink an app when you move it to the iPad.
The mail app is a good example:
On the iPhone, it's a single column table (scrollable list) with a drill-down:
Mailboxes-->mail summary-->mail detail (the email message)
On the iPad, it's a two tables (side-by-side scrollable lists) with a drill down on the left list
Mailboxes-->mail summary left column or popup (portrait)
mail detail (the email message) right column or underlay (portrait)
The controls and text are about 30-50% larger than on the smaller screen.
If you started with the larger format and scale it down to 45% of the original-- it could easily be less usable than the iPhone.
Samsung, on their Galaxy Tab appears to have provided all the basic "system apps" (mail, calendar, contacts, browser, etc.) where this might be a factor. What they appear to have done is something between the iPhone and iPad -- something specifically scaled to the 7" format.
This, at least, looks OK. Any other Android tablets that do not provide their own "system apps" will have them disproportionate to the size of the screen.
.
Unfortunately Dick you are talking to the senseless.
I haven't heard the transcript yet, but I will. I would say, however, that I find Steve's style of speaking, and his facial expressions when giving his viewpoint, are more akin to somebody who is amazed that not everyone else"gets it", especially when it's so "obvious" to him. This is somewhat typical of a true genius .... slightly impatient ... as their thinking is way ahead of most of us. I can easily see where this might come off as bitching.
Impatient? Steve? Well... at least he didn't call anyone a Bozo!
Either way, it's looking like Samsung WILL be giving us some decent stuff in the future.
yet they can't get near apple's profits in mobiles. and now they charge $1k for a 7" tablet. i hope they put out some decent stuff, don't get me wrong.
Except that they don't sell apps like iWork for the iPod touch. The iPad is a viable general purpose computer. The iPhone and touch are not.
Those are two red herrings.
They do not sell iTouch for any 7 inch device either.
Whether or not the iPad is a "viable general purpose computer" ain't got nothin to do with nothin.
The subject of discussion is "Jobs then quipped that small form-factor tablets will need to ship with sandpaper so users can file down their fingers to the point where they can hit smaller targets on the screen. Elements can only get so small before users can't perform these types of touch and pinch gestures, Jobs insisted."
His comments are equally applicable to the iTouch.
The internet has millions of websites .... does that keep people off the net? Quality app developers will go where the "foot traffic" goes. I can only see the overall quality of the app store getting better and better .... just like the web experience of the last several years.
I've never understood the App Store crowding/hard to find things argument.
How is this different from, say, the PC software market? There, you've got literally millions of potential applications vying for your attention, and the entire internet to find them on. How could anyone possibly ever locate a quality app, and how can developers possible make money?
The same way vendors always have: by building a great product and advertising. Why are we obliged to assume that being in the App Store means that that is your one and only way of getting exposure for your product? Do the people that sell stuff in Walmart figure that once they get a product on the shelves they're done? Do Walmart shoppers just throw up their hands and say "Wow, there's way too much shit in this place, how am I supposed to know which ones are any good?"
Make a website. Send copies to tast makers. Buy some ad space on a heavily trafficked blog with a readership that fits your demographic. Just because App Store means that most anyone can get an iOS application in front of potential buyers doesn't mean that the App Store is obliged to market that app. And just because the App Store gives me a central location to purchase apps doesn't mean that the App Store is obliged to do all my research for me and magically guide me to the that particular app that best suits my needs.
It depends on what the app need to do in the background. Xcode cannot read developers minds. The developer have to tell the app what to do when it goes to the back ground and what to do when the app becomes active. However, if there are no special background processes then the developer don't have anything to worry about it since iOS it self implement the save state feature (AKA fast app switching).
Multitasking and background processes are device independent. Meaning they work exactly the same on all device and the developer don't have to worry about different devices. They either work or don't.
Again, not quite true..
I had an iPhone app that had several tabs and drill downs where the user could enter or modify data.
Until iOS 4 I was able to save state with the following in the appropriate ViewControllers:
Unfortunately Dick you are talking to the senseless.
If you design an app for a 7inch screen, you'll be fine. Why doesn't Steve get this? Hell, with a 7inch screen you would get the benefit of bigger real estate and the real possibility you could continue to thumb type.
If you have designed an app for the small iPhone screen it will scale up 2x on the iPad screen. Most apps look ugly -- bigger but ugly, with a lot of wasted space! The controls are too big, the text is too big -- lots of jaggies because no anti-aliasing.
There are exceptions, but you usually have to rethink an app when you move it to the iPad.
The mail app is a good example:
On the iPhone, it's a single column table (scrollable list) with a drill-down:
Mailboxes-->mail summary-->mail detail (the email message)
On the iPad, it's a two tables (side-by-side scrollable lists) with a drill down on the left list
Mailboxes-->mail summary left column or popup (portrait)
mail detail (the email message) right column or underlay (portrait)
The controls and text are about 30-50% larger than on the smaller screen.
If you started with the larger format and scale it down to 45% of the original-- it could easily be less usable than the iPhone.
Samsung, on their Galaxy Tab appears to have provided all the basic "system apps" (mail, calendar, contacts, browser, etc.) where this might be a factor. What they appear to have done is something between the iPhone and iPad -- something specifically scaled to the 7" format.
This, at least, looks OK. Any other Android tablets that do not provide their own "system apps" will have them disproportionate to the size of the screen.
.
you guys need to "get a room!" You and ProfPeabody!
Samsung, on their Galaxy Tab appears to have provided all the basic "system apps" (mail, calendar, contacts, browser, etc.) where this might be a factor. What they appear to have done is something between the iPhone and iPad -- something specifically scaled to the 7" format.
My neighbor just bought the Samsung and was showing me the features. The Graffiti like interface for contact search is quite impressive as is the swipe text entry.
That would require some pretty good batteries in those 'wireless' headphones. You're probably right though. Especially for running. That's where a watch-music-player would totally excel.
For portable music players a watch with good wireless headphones makes a tonne of sense. The headphones is where the innovation needs to happen though, not the nano itself. They need to have serious battery life, and they need to be tiny. And just as important it needs to be no "extra" hassle to charge the headphones.
yet they can't get near apple's profits in mobiles. and now they charge $1k for a 7" tablet. i hope they put out some decent stuff, don't get me wrong.
Yeah, and I read somewhere that they were going to build 100,000 per month.
Too little, too late.
However, I must admit, that of all the videos I've seen, the Galaxy Tab looks solid and well implemented-- and, most of all, it looks like it really exists
Typically I?d agree that a dismissal from Jobs means that they are planning it, but the wording typically focuses on how Apple doesn?t have the ability to make the crap others are doing or some other vague comments, but this was specifically about the 7? tablet and he was very specific about that.
Based on that wording and the likelihood that Apple prototyped numerous shapes and sizes in HW before landing on the 9.7? 4:3 1024x768 iPad that they really don?t have any plans for a 7? iPad. That said, I welcome it as it?s 4x the area as iPhone/Touch display and ¼ the area of the iPad, and can fit in lab coats as often noted as the only real world example for this size display.
If Jobs is using some very weak misdirect to deter other tablet makers that really have no choice as they can?t compete with the iPad directly on display size, they may just be waiting for the iPad to situate for a couple years before introducing a new display size as this will require a new UI to be developed, a new App Store and new SDK. This isn?t something that should be pushed on the heals of the current iPad even if it was ready, at least not unless they can?t get 9.7? iPad component supply, like the display, but i don?t think that is the case.
They do not sell iTouch for any 7 inch device either.
Whether or not the iPad is a "viable general purpose computer" ain't got nothin to do with nothin.
The subject of discussion is "Jobs then quipped that small form-factor tablets will need to ship with sandpaper so users can file down their fingers to the point where they can hit smaller targets on the screen. Elements can only get so small before users can't perform these types of touch and pinch gestures, Jobs insisted."
His comments are equally applicable to the iTouch.
A lot of people have gone through this but let me spell it out for you.
Take any app that runs on both the the iPhone as well as the iPad. You'll find that their user interfaces are quite different from each other. The iPhone version has fewer controls on each page than the iPad version because there is a lot less screen real estate on the iPhone. So the developer has to write two UIs - one for the iPad version of his app and one for the iPhone version.
Now take a 7 inch iPad. Which of the two versions of the UI would you use? Let's start with the iPad version - which is what you would want to do since this is a tablet. If you do that, your UI gets scaled down and you end up with UI elements that are way too small for anyone's fingers to comfortably manipulate. That is what Steve Jobs was referring to. The problem does not apply to the iPhone/iPod Touch because the UI is completely different. Using a scaled-up iPhone UI on your 7 inch screen does not work either. That will look ridiculous - you end up with comically large buttons and text on your screen.
So, to make a good app for a 7 inch tablet, the app developer needs have yet another UI for his app. This is not something that Jobs thinks most developers will be willing to do.
They do not sell iTouch for any 7 inch device either.
Whether or not the iPad is a "viable general purpose computer" ain't got nothin to do with nothin.
The subject of discussion is "Jobs then quipped that small form-factor tablets will need to ship with sandpaper so users can file down their fingers to the point where they can hit smaller targets on the screen. Elements can only get so small before users can't perform these types of touch and pinch gestures, Jobs insisted."
His comments are equally applicable to the iTouch.
No! The iTouch controls start out big enough!
If you 2x them on the iPad, they are too big.
Native (not 2 x) iPad increases the control (key) size by about 30%.
If the 7" Tablet tries to downsize the slightly larger iPad controls, proportionate to the screen (keep the same screen layout) they will be smaller than the iTouch
iTouch control (key) size == 1
iPad control (key) size == 1.3 on a 4x screen
7" Tab control (key) size == .7 on .49 screen
Math aside, an iPad control scaled down to a 7" tablet is smaller than an iPhone control.
Comments
Except that they don't sell apps like iWork for the iPod touch. The iPad is a viable general purpose computer. The iPhone and touch are not.
Re-word your post dude.
ipad is a great computer.
ipod touch and iphone ares still viable computers .
The IPOD touch has 10,000 times more computing power compared to the computer that was on the apollo 13 space craft to the moon ... I sentence you to the ZUNE store !!!
Apple may just buy the moon !!!
9
His comments are even more applicable to a 3.2 inch screen than a 7 inch screen. That is the point he wishes people would overlook.
Actually, no their not.
The controls and text on the small iPhone screen are small but usable-- even for people with fat fingers (like me).
When you write an app for the iPad, you increase the size of things slightly -- to make the controls easier to touch, farther apart and text easier to read. The iPad has about 4x the real estate as the iPhone-- but you don't make things 4x larger. Rather, you put more information on the screen and/or make it more pleasing to the eye.
Conversely, in another post, I discuss why you can't easily downsize an app from a larger screen to a smaller screen -- you need to rethink the application.
You might be able to implement the iTunes multi-column UI on an iPad (barely). I don't think it would work on a 7" screen -- certainly not on an iPhone screen.
.
Yes it is a sensible argument!
If you have designed an app for the small iPhone screen it will scale up 2x on the iPad screen. Most apps look ugly -- bigger but ugly, with a lot of wasted space! The controls are too big, the text is too big -- lots of jaggies because no anti-aliasing.
There are exceptions, but you usually have to rethink an app when you move it to the iPad.
The mail app is a good example:
On the iPhone, it's a single column table (scrollable list) with a drill-down:
Mailboxes-->mail summary-->mail detail (the email message)
On the iPad, it's a two tables (side-by-side scrollable lists) with a drill down on the left list
Mailboxes-->mail summary left column or popup (portrait)
mail detail (the email message) right column or underlay (portrait)
The controls and text are about 30-50% larger than on the smaller screen.
If you started with the larger format and scale it down to 45% of the original-- it could easily be less usable than the iPhone.
Samsung, on their Galaxy Tab appears to have provided all the basic "system apps" (mail, calendar, contacts, browser, etc.) where this might be a factor. What they appear to have done is something between the iPhone and iPad -- something specifically scaled to the 7" format.
This, at least, looks OK. Any other Android tablets that do not provide their own "system apps" will have them disproportionate to the size of the screen.
.
Unfortunately Dick you are talking to the senseless.
I haven't heard the transcript yet, but I will. I would say, however, that I find Steve's style of speaking, and his facial expressions when giving his viewpoint, are more akin to somebody who is amazed that not everyone else"gets it", especially when it's so "obvious" to him. This is somewhat typical of a true genius .... slightly impatient ... as their thinking is way ahead of most of us. I can easily see where this might come off as bitching.
Impatient? Steve? Well... at least he didn't call anyone a Bozo!
.
Either way, it's looking like Samsung WILL be giving us some decent stuff in the future.
yet they can't get near apple's profits in mobiles. and now they charge $1k for a 7" tablet. i hope they put out some decent stuff, don't get me wrong.
Except that they don't sell apps like iWork for the iPod touch. The iPad is a viable general purpose computer. The iPhone and touch are not.
Those are two red herrings.
They do not sell iTouch for any 7 inch device either.
Whether or not the iPad is a "viable general purpose computer" ain't got nothin to do with nothin.
The subject of discussion is "Jobs then quipped that small form-factor tablets will need to ship with sandpaper so users can file down their fingers to the point where they can hit smaller targets on the screen. Elements can only get so small before users can't perform these types of touch and pinch gestures, Jobs insisted."
His comments are equally applicable to the iTouch.
forgot my point
i just would love 8in x7in ipad or touch
lab coat sized
9
The internet has millions of websites .... does that keep people off the net? Quality app developers will go where the "foot traffic" goes. I can only see the overall quality of the app store getting better and better .... just like the web experience of the last several years.
I've never understood the App Store crowding/hard to find things argument.
How is this different from, say, the PC software market? There, you've got literally millions of potential applications vying for your attention, and the entire internet to find them on. How could anyone possibly ever locate a quality app, and how can developers possible make money?
The same way vendors always have: by building a great product and advertising. Why are we obliged to assume that being in the App Store means that that is your one and only way of getting exposure for your product? Do the people that sell stuff in Walmart figure that once they get a product on the shelves they're done? Do Walmart shoppers just throw up their hands and say "Wow, there's way too much shit in this place, how am I supposed to know which ones are any good?"
Make a website. Send copies to tast makers. Buy some ad space on a heavily trafficked blog with a readership that fits your demographic. Just because App Store means that most anyone can get an iOS application in front of potential buyers doesn't mean that the App Store is obliged to market that app. And just because the App Store gives me a central location to purchase apps doesn't mean that the App Store is obliged to do all my research for me and magically guide me to the that particular app that best suits my needs.
It depends on what the app need to do in the background. Xcode cannot read developers minds. The developer have to tell the app what to do when it goes to the back ground and what to do when the app becomes active. However, if there are no special background processes then the developer don't have anything to worry about it since iOS it self implement the save state feature (AKA fast app switching).
Multitasking and background processes are device independent. Meaning they work exactly the same on all device and the developer don't have to worry about different devices. They either work or don't.
Again, not quite true..
I had an iPhone app that had several tabs and drill downs where the user could enter or modify data.
Until iOS 4 I was able to save state with the following in the appropriate ViewControllers:
- (void)viewWillDisappear
[super viewWillDisappear:animated];
if(DEBUG) MLogString(@"viewWillDisappear: ");
[(id)[[UIApplication sharedApplication] delegate] performSelectorOnMainThread:@selector(saveQuote) withObject:nil waitUntilDone:YES];
With iOS4 i had to add the following because the viewWillDisappear callback is not triggered when an app is suspended (home button single press)
I had to add the following to the appDelegate to save state in iOS 4 and above when a task is suspended):
- (void)applicationDidEnterBackground
if(DEBUG) MLogString(@"applicationDidEnterBackground: |%@|", [self dateInFormat:@"%Y-%m-%d-%H:%M:%S"]);
[self saveQuote];
}
No big deal... once I figured out what was[n't] happening.
.
Unfortunately Dick you are talking to the senseless.
If you design an app for a 7inch screen, you'll be fine. Why doesn't Steve get this? Hell, with a 7inch screen you would get the benefit of bigger real estate and the real possibility you could continue to thumb type.
Yes it is a sensible argument!
If you have designed an app for the small iPhone screen it will scale up 2x on the iPad screen. Most apps look ugly -- bigger but ugly, with a lot of wasted space! The controls are too big, the text is too big -- lots of jaggies because no anti-aliasing.
There are exceptions, but you usually have to rethink an app when you move it to the iPad.
The mail app is a good example:
On the iPhone, it's a single column table (scrollable list) with a drill-down:
Mailboxes-->mail summary-->mail detail (the email message)
On the iPad, it's a two tables (side-by-side scrollable lists) with a drill down on the left list
Mailboxes-->mail summary left column or popup (portrait)
mail detail (the email message) right column or underlay (portrait)
The controls and text are about 30-50% larger than on the smaller screen.
If you started with the larger format and scale it down to 45% of the original-- it could easily be less usable than the iPhone.
Samsung, on their Galaxy Tab appears to have provided all the basic "system apps" (mail, calendar, contacts, browser, etc.) where this might be a factor. What they appear to have done is something between the iPhone and iPad -- something specifically scaled to the 7" format.
This, at least, looks OK. Any other Android tablets that do not provide their own "system apps" will have them disproportionate to the size of the screen.
.
you guys need to "get a room!" You and ProfPeabody!
Best
Samsung, on their Galaxy Tab appears to have provided all the basic "system apps" (mail, calendar, contacts, browser, etc.) where this might be a factor. What they appear to have done is something between the iPhone and iPad -- something specifically scaled to the 7" format.
My neighbor just bought the Samsung and was showing me the features. The Graffiti like interface for contact search is quite impressive as is the swipe text entry.
Steve's dismissal of 7" screens probably means we'll see then as soon a next quarter from Apple.
Good point!
That would require some pretty good batteries in those 'wireless' headphones. You're probably right though. Especially for running. That's where a watch-music-player would totally excel.
For portable music players a watch with good wireless headphones makes a tonne of sense. The headphones is where the innovation needs to happen though, not the nano itself. They need to have serious battery life, and they need to be tiny. And just as important it needs to be no "extra" hassle to charge the headphones.
Everything old is new again...
.
If Apple wants a low-end iPad to sell alongside iPad 2.0 next year, they can just keep the
current iPad 1.0 low-end model and drop its price by $100. BOOM. Works for iPhone,
wil work for iPad if Apple ever needs to do it. Not very likely.
yet they can't get near apple's profits in mobiles. and now they charge $1k for a 7" tablet. i hope they put out some decent stuff, don't get me wrong.
Yeah, and I read somewhere that they were going to build 100,000 per month.
Too little, too late.
However, I must admit, that of all the videos I've seen, the Galaxy Tab looks solid and well implemented-- and, most of all, it looks like it really exists
,
Good point!
Typically I?d agree that a dismissal from Jobs means that they are planning it, but the wording typically focuses on how Apple doesn?t have the ability to make the crap others are doing or some other vague comments, but this was specifically about the 7? tablet and he was very specific about that.
Based on that wording and the likelihood that Apple prototyped numerous shapes and sizes in HW before landing on the 9.7? 4:3 1024x768 iPad that they really don?t have any plans for a 7? iPad. That said, I welcome it as it?s 4x the area as iPhone/Touch display and ¼ the area of the iPad, and can fit in lab coats as often noted as the only real world example for this size display.
If Jobs is using some very weak misdirect to deter other tablet makers that really have no choice as they can?t compete with the iPad directly on display size, they may just be waiting for the iPad to situate for a couple years before introducing a new display size as this will require a new UI to be developed, a new App Store and new SDK. This isn?t something that should be pushed on the heals of the current iPad even if it was ready, at least not unless they can?t get 9.7? iPad component supply, like the display, but i don?t think that is the case.
Those are two red herrings.
They do not sell iTouch for any 7 inch device either.
Whether or not the iPad is a "viable general purpose computer" ain't got nothin to do with nothin.
The subject of discussion is "Jobs then quipped that small form-factor tablets will need to ship with sandpaper so users can file down their fingers to the point where they can hit smaller targets on the screen. Elements can only get so small before users can't perform these types of touch and pinch gestures, Jobs insisted."
His comments are equally applicable to the iTouch.
A lot of people have gone through this but let me spell it out for you.
Take any app that runs on both the the iPhone as well as the iPad. You'll find that their user interfaces are quite different from each other. The iPhone version has fewer controls on each page than the iPad version because there is a lot less screen real estate on the iPhone. So the developer has to write two UIs - one for the iPad version of his app and one for the iPhone version.
Now take a 7 inch iPad. Which of the two versions of the UI would you use? Let's start with the iPad version - which is what you would want to do since this is a tablet. If you do that, your UI gets scaled down and you end up with UI elements that are way too small for anyone's fingers to comfortably manipulate. That is what Steve Jobs was referring to. The problem does not apply to the iPhone/iPod Touch because the UI is completely different. Using a scaled-up iPhone UI on your 7 inch screen does not work either. That will look ridiculous - you end up with comically large buttons and text on your screen.
So, to make a good app for a 7 inch tablet, the app developer needs have yet another UI for his app. This is not something that Jobs thinks most developers will be willing to do.
- HCE
Those are two red herrings.
They do not sell iTouch for any 7 inch device either.
Whether or not the iPad is a "viable general purpose computer" ain't got nothin to do with nothin.
The subject of discussion is "Jobs then quipped that small form-factor tablets will need to ship with sandpaper so users can file down their fingers to the point where they can hit smaller targets on the screen. Elements can only get so small before users can't perform these types of touch and pinch gestures, Jobs insisted."
His comments are equally applicable to the iTouch.
No! The iTouch controls start out big enough!
If you 2x them on the iPad, they are too big.
Native (not 2 x) iPad increases the control (key) size by about 30%.
If the 7" Tablet tries to downsize the slightly larger iPad controls, proportionate to the screen (keep the same screen layout) they will be smaller than the iTouch
iTouch control (key) size == 1
iPad control (key) size == 1.3 on a 4x screen
7" Tab control (key) size == .7 on .49 screen
Math aside, an iPad control scaled down to a 7" tablet is smaller than an iPhone control.
.