Citing a Chinese source, Japanese website Macotakara reported on Wednesday that this new mystery product will have a screen resolution of either 1,600 pixels by 960 pixels, or 1,280 by 960 pixels.
That's a rather odd rumour. How it they have two different yet specific display sizes that are so very different. One is 16.7:10 aspect ration with 373 PPI, the other with a 4:3 aspect ratio with 320 PPI.
At least the article is calling it a "device" and not an iPhone or iPad mini.
I have justification for a 4.45" display, almost 4.6". A 4.45" display with 1280x720 resolution would have a pixel density identical to the 4/4S, so onscreen elements would be physically the exact same size, but overall real estate would be higher.
1280x720 is a 16x9 ratio.. The iPhone at 960x640 is a 3x2 ratio.... So that's not going to happen..
I hope they don't go any bigger than a 4" screen... 1000x666 with a 4" screen equals 330 PPI..
I am still waiting on my tabletop computer -- enough with small devices, I want LARGE PANEL touch devices. This, my friends, would be breakthrough!! Like something out of future-sci-fi movies.
First thing that crossed my mind when I saw this story. Even if this isn't the final size I bet the Apple TV has a metal and glass remote with touch acres and retina display
Jobs said they had already worked with different screen sizes and arrived at the current ipad size as optimal. still, i would buy a 5" ipad like device or even better a 5" iphone.
No, and hell no.
If they are indeed making a 5" device, it's going to be a larger ipod touch, or maybe a iNotepad or something, but a 5" or 7" device is not a good device size.
The existing iPad size is mostly perfect. I say mostly as it's still a design compromise where you can watch HD video and read a full page of A5 or turn it to landscape mode and read two pages at a time which you can't do with the smaller ebook readers but you need for Comic books and Manga. It's the same aspect ratio CRT screens were all along. Which is when films were also 4:3 aspect ratios, but that was changed in the 1950's, and CRT's stayed 4:3.
I do like the idea of a "stylus" for drawing, but not much else. This would be more useful on the existing iPad as seen here: http://tenonedesign.com/bluetiger.php with pressure sensitiveness, but otherwise stylus's are a holdback from resistive touch screens on the older PDA's that had on-screen keyboards with buttons 3mm wide. It shouldn't be required, and I think Apple achieved that.
"Does anybody know of an apple website that filters out all the crap and only reports stuff worth reading?"
Skip the articles and go straight to the forum. Ignore the usual suspects, reading only from the well informed, founded statements made by the people who spent 18 hours a day on that site. It's a shame vBulletin is such crap software, where you can only put posters on an ignore list, rather than subscribing to the ones who make informative posts. Although, you will miss out on newbies who actually have something to say. Oh well, a simple 'thumbs up' button would be better, one can hope.
Amazon and other Androil tablet producers wouldn't be scared. They would run for their money if 8-inch iPad is possible and priced at $299. I think Apple can make this device and successfully out compete the competitors in that category. Imagine the current iPad 2 is shrunk to 8" screen. Would anyone buy other 7" tablets if 8" iPad 2 is available now at $299? I doubt it.
I think people are greatly underestimating the savings by going to a smaller screen. The current iPad is $499 for 10". An 8" iPad for $299 would be 40% less. Let's break it down by component:
- CPU - no significant change in cost
- RAM - no change in cost
- Flash - no change in cost
- Screen - 8" screen is 36% smaller. Even if you assume that the cost is proportional to size, that's a 36% savings. In reality, savings would be less
- Battery - Only the screen size would affect battery life - everything else remains the same, so battery size reduction would be considerably less than 36% . Alternatively, they might be forced to use a much smaller battery and offer a shorter battery life
- Support chips (WiFi, LTE, etc) - no change in cost
- Manufacturing assembly costs - no change
- Overheads - no change
Based on that, if they simply produced the current iPad in a smaller size, the savings would not be sufficient to offer it at $299. They could, of course, offer a severely limited 8" iPad and cut corners on all of the above components (such as basing it on the iPad 1 or iPad 2), but I don't think that's likely.
Might not be a bad idea given that Samsung just announced they've sold 3 million Galaxy Note devices in the past 4 weeks alone. And yes they do mean sold to customers not inventory held by resellers. Buy hey nobody wants a 5" device - I know coz some dude on AI said so and they're never wrong are they.
I was only half joking. I would rock this mythical iNote, replacing my iPhone and iPad with a single device that is small enough to carry everywhere, but big enough to consume and browse mass content. Apple could keep it thin and sexy, but with an even more ridiculous battery life. 1024x768 would be good enough of a res for me and is already supported natively. As for a stylus, I bought one for my iPad a long time ago but have yet to bother trying it out.
Comments
Imagine the current iPad 2 is shrunk to 8" screen.
I'm imagining a completely pointless device? and a commercial failure.
Citing a Chinese source, Japanese website Macotakara reported on Wednesday that this new mystery product will have a screen resolution of either 1,600 pixels by 960 pixels, or 1,280 by 960 pixels.
That's a rather odd rumour. How it they have two different yet specific display sizes that are so very different. One is 16.7:10 aspect ration with 373 PPI, the other with a 4:3 aspect ratio with 320 PPI.
At least the article is calling it a "device" and not an iPhone or iPad mini.
I have justification for a 4.45" display, almost 4.6". A 4.45" display with 1280x720 resolution would have a pixel density identical to the 4/4S, so onscreen elements would be physically the exact same size, but overall real estate would be higher.
1280x720 is a 16x9 ratio.. The iPhone at 960x640 is a 3x2 ratio.... So that's not going to happen..
I hope they don't go any bigger than a 4" screen... 1000x666 with a 4" screen equals 330 PPI..
I am still waiting on my tabletop computer -- enough with small devices, I want LARGE PANEL touch devices. This, my friends, would be breakthrough!! Like something out of future-sci-fi movies.
Monkey boy has been selling them for many years.
I hope they call it the iNote and it includes a stylus.
And maybe adopt Android? Hoboy! Samsung can't wait to sue Apple for copying their copy of Apple's design.
</sarcasm>
Whatever. Rumors aren't products. Call me when Tim Cook is holding one on stage.
Jobs said they had already worked with different screen sizes and arrived at the current ipad size as optimal.
He also said he was infertile.
this is the TV's remote.
First thing that crossed my mind when I saw this story. Even if this isn't the final size I bet the Apple TV has a metal and glass remote with touch acres and retina display
Jobs said they had already worked with different screen sizes and arrived at the current ipad size as optimal. still, i would buy a 5" ipad like device or even better a 5" iphone.
No, and hell no.
If they are indeed making a 5" device, it's going to be a larger ipod touch, or maybe a iNotepad or something, but a 5" or 7" device is not a good device size.
The existing iPad size is mostly perfect. I say mostly as it's still a design compromise where you can watch HD video and read a full page of A5 or turn it to landscape mode and read two pages at a time which you can't do with the smaller ebook readers but you need for Comic books and Manga. It's the same aspect ratio CRT screens were all along. Which is when films were also 4:3 aspect ratios, but that was changed in the 1950's, and CRT's stayed 4:3.
I do like the idea of a "stylus" for drawing, but not much else. This would be more useful on the existing iPad as seen here: http://tenonedesign.com/bluetiger.php with pressure sensitiveness, but otherwise stylus's are a holdback from resistive touch screens on the older PDA's that had on-screen keyboards with buttons 3mm wide. It shouldn't be required, and I think Apple achieved that.
"Does anybody know of an apple website that filters out all the crap and only reports stuff worth reading?"
Skip the articles and go straight to the forum. Ignore the usual suspects, reading only from the well informed, founded statements made by the people who spent 18 hours a day on that site. It's a shame vBulletin is such crap software, where you can only put posters on an ignore list, rather than subscribing to the ones who make informative posts. Although, you will miss out on newbies who actually have something to say. Oh well, a simple 'thumbs up' button would be better, one can hope.
Amazon and other Androil tablet producers wouldn't be scared. They would run for their money if 8-inch iPad is possible and priced at $299. I think Apple can make this device and successfully out compete the competitors in that category. Imagine the current iPad 2 is shrunk to 8" screen. Would anyone buy other 7" tablets if 8" iPad 2 is available now at $299? I doubt it.
I think people are greatly underestimating the savings by going to a smaller screen. The current iPad is $499 for 10". An 8" iPad for $299 would be 40% less. Let's break it down by component:
- CPU - no significant change in cost
- RAM - no change in cost
- Flash - no change in cost
- Screen - 8" screen is 36% smaller. Even if you assume that the cost is proportional to size, that's a 36% savings. In reality, savings would be less
- Battery - Only the screen size would affect battery life - everything else remains the same, so battery size reduction would be considerably less than 36% . Alternatively, they might be forced to use a much smaller battery and offer a shorter battery life
- Support chips (WiFi, LTE, etc) - no change in cost
- Manufacturing assembly costs - no change
- Overheads - no change
Based on that, if they simply produced the current iPad in a smaller size, the savings would not be sufficient to offer it at $299. They could, of course, offer a severely limited 8" iPad and cut corners on all of the above components (such as basing it on the iPad 1 or iPad 2), but I don't think that's likely.
Might not be a bad idea given that Samsung just announced they've sold 3 million Galaxy Note devices in the past 4 weeks alone. And yes they do mean sold to customers not inventory held by resellers. Buy hey nobody wants a 5" device - I know coz some dude on AI said so and they're never wrong are they.
I was only half joking. I would rock this mythical iNote, replacing my iPhone and iPad with a single device that is small enough to carry everywhere, but big enough to consume and browse mass content. Apple could keep it thin and sexy, but with an even more ridiculous battery life. 1024x768 would be good enough of a res for me and is already supported natively. As for a stylus, I bought one for my iPad a long time ago but have yet to bother trying it out.