I think the poster was simply implying that a lower pixel density can be considered Retina if the device is normally used at a greater distance from the viewer's eyes.
Sure, but I wasn't implying the opposite so I don't see how that is relevant.
I was simply saying that if a 7.85-inch screen needs 330 PPI, it needs the same resolution as The New iPad. And that is not going to happen for a lower-cost product. The report/source is inaccurate. I'm sure a 7.85-inch iPad is coming - no dobut - but let's not believe everything people make up.
Everyone refers to the current 9.7" iPad as a 10" format. So it makes sense that we should refer to a rumored 7.85" iPad as an 8" format, no?
I don't get why everyone's referring to it as a 7" iPad...
It's a bit less than a 2" diagonal reduction, which will be somewhat more than half the screen size of the current iPad, if my math is correct?
There are a whole bunch of competing handhelds (I'm done calling these multi-touch mobile devices "tablets"… I think "handheld is more apt), ranging from 5" up to 12" in size… the most popular grouping seem to be exactly 7", 9.7" and 10.1". There are also a few in the 8" size range, so if a new iPad is 7.85" in size, then it's rightly an "8-inch" category device...
Will Apple do this? I'm not so sure. But Steve was not always right (or more accurately, his opinion might have been right at the time, but might not remain correct forever)… markets and needs shift, and formats sometimes unexpectedly pass the 'user acceptance test'... Perhaps it's showing that a lower-priced 7~8" tablet has a substantial niche after all, and if so, I can't imagine Apple NOT filling it...
We have 11" and 13" MB Airs… why not 8" & 10" iPads?
The iPad mini at, say, twice the size of an iPhone with the same form factor would work. That is, it can run the springboard and retina apps written for the iPhone at full resolution, but - obviously - without retina. So a universal app designed for the iPhone and present day iPad would look like the iPhone version on the 7" iPad but use different UI on the 10" model.
This would keep the 10" iPad as a premium model as it would look better than a large iPhone, people would use the cheaper one for reading and as a larger iPhone.
other advantages - it already has a huge number of apps available and you can download all your phone apps to it, and they will just work.
Sorry but you're out of touch with the market.
I and others wanted a smaller iPad for just book reading. I got tired of reading books on my iPhone4. Wife has an iPad2 for that and more.
So early this year I got a Black Berry PlayBook. Nice screen, but not so nice for software. Some SW aspects are better than the iPad, but many are not so good.
Looking forward to Apple's iPad Mini ! Oh I also have a few friends waiting for it.
You bought a RIM Playbook and it's me who's out of touch with market?
Would an iPad mini without a bezel be sensible? You could then hold it in one hand, just like an iPhone, even people with small hands. While looking for a mockup, I found this, pretty cool:
Would an iPad mini without a bezel be sensible? You could then hold it in one hand, just like an iPhone, even people with small hands. While looking for a mockup, I found this, pretty cool:
I don't think it's feasible now to have no bezel. I also don't think it's sensible as the bezel creates a natural border where you can place your hands/fingers There are certainly uses for having no bezel and technologies that would around it but I think all such effort to make it a viable feature are still many years away. You can see in the mockup video (where things can be made ideal) that when he unlocks it the icons are far too close to the left edge where his left hand is using it to be comfortable. We have white space on paper in books for a reason and we've had them there even when paper was overly expensive.
As for the magnets or NFC in the pic I'm not sure what use that would be. First of all, I don't get how the magnets being on the edge could then make the two pieces solid and rigid without an interlocking system that isn't present on the two beveled edges. You'd have to connect them with a Higgs 5-sigma intensity (just making stuff up now ????).
Second, I don't NFC at all for transferring the data. The only use I can see for NFC in such a device is for verification when they get within 6"/150mm of each other but if the goal is to wait until they touch then that makes it a moot point and you'll still need a much faster connector, like WiFi, to stream video to the 2nd device so both can double as one monitor. You could use a physical connector since they are touching but since there doesn't seem to be any pins along the side to facilitate that it's going to have to be wireless.
[quote name="Jetz" url="/t/151067/apples-ipad-mini-rumored-with-7-85-igzo-display-for-250-300/120#post_2139858"]I'd argue that Apple does whatever maximizes their profits…[/QUOTE]
I know for a fact they don't. It's nonsense when people keep saying this is all that Apple cares about. Doing this is the easiest way to make stuff that no one would actually want.
I'd argue that Apple does whatever maximizes their profits…
I know for a fact they don't. It's nonsense when people keep saying this is all that Apple cares about. Doing this is the easiest way to make stuff that no one would actually want.
They do work to maximize their profits. All for-profits companies do. The difference between Apple and many other tech companies is that Apple's maximizing is looking at the long term while many of these tech companies can't see past the next quarter results. They all have the same goal but they go about it very differently.
Would an iPad mini without a bezel be sensible? You could then hold it in one hand, just like an iPhone, even people with small hands. While looking for a mockup, I found this, pretty cool:
They'd need to have a system to weed out finger contact from holding the edges from finger contacts intended to be control signals. Even if you do that, those fingers holding the edge would still cover up some of the screen. I just don't think it's well-advised. The bezel could be narrower, but I don't see where no bezel is a good idea for a hand held product.
I'd argue that Apple does whatever maximizes their profits…
I know for a fact they don't. It's nonsense when people keep saying this is all that Apple cares about. Doing this is the easiest way to make stuff that no one would actually want.
There was a long standing myth that Apple was some kind of altruistic hippy commune building products for the good of mankind. It's total BS.
Apple is driven by one singular objective - to make as much money as possible.
and no, its not that i am not clever enough to post from another IP. you guys just ain't worth the trouble.
You say it's not worth the trouble, yet you're here. Which is the lie, your post content, or the fact that you've made 10 posts to say it's not worth posting here?
There was a long standing myth that Apple was some kind of altruistic hippy commune building products for the good of mankind. It's total BS.
Apple is driven by one singular objective - to make as much money as possible.
Shaun UK should stick to trolling at macrumors, better yet Engadget so I don't have to read his drivel.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
They do work to maximize their profits. All for-profits companies do. The difference between Apple and many other tech companies is that Apple's maximizing is looking at the long term while many of these tech companies can't see past the next quarter results. They all have the same goal but they go about it very differently.
I feel $299 would be a very good price point, for a better product than those $199 tablets. Likely the iPad2 would be fropped.
As for 7" vs 8", my BB PB has very wide borders. With less border, an iPad mini could be the same overall size.
I disagree with both your points.
On price. It's not trivial to ask the most price-sensitive consumers to shell out 50% more. Only Apple fans used to paying a hundred more than comparable tech for Apple's quality wouldn't think so. Paying $100 more to go from a Samsung Tab to an iPad is not really that contentious. It's maybe 25% more. Paying 50% more to go from a Nexus 7 (with 26% more pixels per inch) to an iPad Mini is going to be a tough sell. Maybe Apple will get existing Macheads to buy them. But it's going to a tough sell in any store carrying the Nexus 7 right beside it.
On size. We're talking 0.85". How much bezel can they knock off before handling becomes an issue? There's a reason they made the Nexus 7 with bigger bezels at the top and bottom (gaming ergonomics). But the iPad doesn't have that option. Ergo, it's going to be huge for a mini-tablet.
Steve probably didn't care about profit as much, but Cook, definitely a more profit centric guy. Which is actually why they might NOT release this because an iPad mini will hurt the profit of 10" iPad.
Smaller and thinner does not add up to increased battery life.
The expectations of people on these boards is beyond all association with reality. You might as well say the new iPad will cure bad breath and has magical stain-removing properties for your clothing. By the "smaller/thinner/better battery life" logic my iPhone battery should last a week in continuous use.
1- Do you not understand that the onscreen elements have to be sized appropriately for use on each size screen?
2- what the hell? Jerk, much?
1- Yes. What's the big deal? Android can run their OS on dozens of different sizes and configurations. Why again can't iOS? If you tell me that the reason is developers and apps- then that's bogus. There are plenty of the SAME app that run on the iphone/ipod touch and the iPad. Again- the same app. While there are iPad and iPhone specific apps, there are also combos. We're not talking about some fragmented mess that android has- were talking about a potential 3... count it, THREE devices. That's all.
2- Not being a jerk. It's just annoying that people keep mentioning pointless quotes from a guy who has been dead for almost a year. Did I think Jobs was awesome? Yes I did- he should have half a semester dedicated to him in every business school. He did things no one else could and was amazing. But- he's dead. His quotes mean jack squat. Hell, his quotes didn't mean much when he was alive! And yet people keep quoting him as if it means a thing about Apple today. I realize Steve's influences run deep in Apple as a mentor and teacher. But Tim Cook is a completely different guy, and Apple isn't the exact same company. Some might argue for better and some might say for worse. I, personally, think it's for better as a shareholder, but I totally understand (and even agree) with the other side of the coin.
But my point is- enough with the Jobs quotes- they bring as much credibility to an argument as a Digitimes article.
I'd argue that Apple does whatever maximizes their profits, not "whatever it feels is right". Usually, it's really good at figuring out what's good for the user and making money in the process. But that's not always true, either.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone
I think the poster was simply implying that a lower pixel density can be considered Retina if the device is normally used at a greater distance from the viewer's eyes.
Sure, but I wasn't implying the opposite so I don't see how that is relevant.
I was simply saying that if a 7.85-inch screen needs 330 PPI, it needs the same resolution as The New iPad. And that is not going to happen for a lower-cost product. The report/source is inaccurate. I'm sure a 7.85-inch iPad is coming - no dobut - but let's not believe everything people make up.
Everyone refers to the current 9.7" iPad as a 10" format. So it makes sense that we should refer to a rumored 7.85" iPad as an 8" format, no?
I don't get why everyone's referring to it as a 7" iPad...
It's a bit less than a 2" diagonal reduction, which will be somewhat more than half the screen size of the current iPad, if my math is correct?
There are a whole bunch of competing handhelds (I'm done calling these multi-touch mobile devices "tablets"… I think "handheld is more apt), ranging from 5" up to 12" in size… the most popular grouping seem to be exactly 7", 9.7" and 10.1". There are also a few in the 8" size range, so if a new iPad is 7.85" in size, then it's rightly an "8-inch" category device...
Will Apple do this? I'm not so sure. But Steve was not always right (or more accurately, his opinion might have been right at the time, but might not remain correct forever)… markets and needs shift, and formats sometimes unexpectedly pass the 'user acceptance test'... Perhaps it's showing that a lower-priced 7~8" tablet has a substantial niche after all, and if so, I can't imagine Apple NOT filling it...
We have 11" and 13" MB Airs… why not 8" & 10" iPads?
Mini ipad will be useful for some people.I am waiting for its release.
The iPad mini at, say, twice the size of an iPhone with the same form factor would work. That is, it can run the springboard and retina apps written for the iPhone at full resolution, but - obviously - without retina. So a universal app designed for the iPhone and present day iPad would look like the iPhone version on the 7" iPad but use different UI on the 10" model.
This would keep the 10" iPad as a premium model as it would look better than a large iPhone, people would use the cheaper one for reading and as a larger iPhone.
other advantages - it already has a huge number of apps available and you can download all your phone apps to it, and they will just work.
You bought a RIM Playbook and it's me who's out of touch with market?
[URL=http://tablet-news.com/2012/02/29/futuristic-ipad-concept-uses-no-bezel-at-all-magnets-to-attach-to-other-ipads-video/][URL=http://forums.appleinsider.com/image/id/170553/width/600/height/330][IMG]http://forums.appleinsider.com/image/id/170553/width/600/height/330[/IMG][/URL][/URL]
[VIDEO]http://tablet-news.com/2012/02/29/futuristic-ipad-concept-uses-no-bezel-at-all-magnets-to-attach-to-other-ipads-video/[/VIDEO]
I don't think it's feasible now to have no bezel. I also don't think it's sensible as the bezel creates a natural border where you can place your hands/fingers There are certainly uses for having no bezel and technologies that would around it but I think all such effort to make it a viable feature are still many years away. You can see in the mockup video (where things can be made ideal) that when he unlocks it the icons are far too close to the left edge where his left hand is using it to be comfortable. We have white space on paper in books for a reason and we've had them there even when paper was overly expensive.
As for the magnets or NFC in the pic I'm not sure what use that would be. First of all, I don't get how the magnets being on the edge could then make the two pieces solid and rigid without an interlocking system that isn't present on the two beveled edges. You'd have to connect them with a Higgs 5-sigma intensity (just making stuff up now ????).
Second, I don't NFC at all for transferring the data. The only use I can see for NFC in such a device is for verification when they get within 6"/150mm of each other but if the goal is to wait until they touch then that makes it a moot point and you'll still need a much faster connector, like WiFi, to stream video to the 2nd device so both can double as one monitor. You could use a physical connector since they are touching but since there doesn't seem to be any pins along the side to facilitate that it's going to have to be wireless.
I know for a fact they don't. It's nonsense when people keep saying this is all that Apple cares about. Doing this is the easiest way to make stuff that no one would actually want.
They do work to maximize their profits. All for-profits companies do. The difference between Apple and many other tech companies is that Apple's maximizing is looking at the long term while many of these tech companies can't see past the next quarter results. They all have the same goal but they go about it very differently.
They'd need to have a system to weed out finger contact from holding the edges from finger contacts intended to be control signals. Even if you do that, those fingers holding the edge would still cover up some of the screen. I just don't think it's well-advised. The bezel could be narrower, but I don't see where no bezel is a good idea for a hand held product.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jetz
I'd argue that Apple does whatever maximizes their profits…
I know for a fact they don't. It's nonsense when people keep saying this is all that Apple cares about. Doing this is the easiest way to make stuff that no one would actually want.
There was a long standing myth that Apple was some kind of altruistic hippy commune building products for the good of mankind. It's total BS.
Apple is driven by one singular objective - to make as much money as possible.
You say it's not worth the trouble, yet you're here. Which is the lie, your post content, or the fact that you've made 10 posts to say it's not worth posting here?
In other news: bye.
I don't remember that one at all.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaun, UK
There was a long standing myth that Apple was some kind of altruistic hippy commune building products for the good of mankind. It's total BS.
Apple is driven by one singular objective - to make as much money as possible.
Shaun UK should stick to trolling at macrumors, better yet Engadget so I don't have to read his drivel.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
They do work to maximize their profits. All for-profits companies do. The difference between Apple and many other tech companies is that Apple's maximizing is looking at the long term while many of these tech companies can't see past the next quarter results. They all have the same goal but they go about it very differently.
.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JoshA
I feel $299 would be a very good price point, for a better product than those $199 tablets. Likely the iPad2 would be fropped.
As for 7" vs 8", my BB PB has very wide borders. With less border, an iPad mini could be the same overall size.
I disagree with both your points.
On price. It's not trivial to ask the most price-sensitive consumers to shell out 50% more. Only Apple fans used to paying a hundred more than comparable tech for Apple's quality wouldn't think so. Paying $100 more to go from a Samsung Tab to an iPad is not really that contentious. It's maybe 25% more. Paying 50% more to go from a Nexus 7 (with 26% more pixels per inch) to an iPad Mini is going to be a tough sell. Maybe Apple will get existing Macheads to buy them. But it's going to a tough sell in any store carrying the Nexus 7 right beside it.
On size. We're talking 0.85". How much bezel can they knock off before handling becomes an issue? There's a reason they made the Nexus 7 with bigger bezels at the top and bottom (gaming ergonomics). But the iPad doesn't have that option. Ergo, it's going to be huge for a mini-tablet.
Steve probably didn't care about profit as much, but Cook, definitely a more profit centric guy. Which is actually why they might NOT release this because an iPad mini will hurt the profit of 10" iPad.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sennen
Smaller and thinner does not add up to increased battery life.
The expectations of people on these boards is beyond all association with reality. You might as well say the new iPad will cure bad breath and has magical stain-removing properties for your clothing. By the "smaller/thinner/better battery life" logic my iPhone battery should last a week in continuous use.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sennen
1- Do you not understand that the onscreen elements have to be sized appropriately for use on each size screen?
2- what the hell? Jerk, much?
1- Yes. What's the big deal? Android can run their OS on dozens of different sizes and configurations. Why again can't iOS? If you tell me that the reason is developers and apps- then that's bogus. There are plenty of the SAME app that run on the iphone/ipod touch and the iPad. Again- the same app. While there are iPad and iPhone specific apps, there are also combos. We're not talking about some fragmented mess that android has- were talking about a potential 3... count it, THREE devices. That's all.
2- Not being a jerk. It's just annoying that people keep mentioning pointless quotes from a guy who has been dead for almost a year. Did I think Jobs was awesome? Yes I did- he should have half a semester dedicated to him in every business school. He did things no one else could and was amazing. But- he's dead. His quotes mean jack squat. Hell, his quotes didn't mean much when he was alive! And yet people keep quoting him as if it means a thing about Apple today. I realize Steve's influences run deep in Apple as a mentor and teacher. But Tim Cook is a completely different guy, and Apple isn't the exact same company. Some might argue for better and some might say for worse. I, personally, think it's for better as a shareholder, but I totally understand (and even agree) with the other side of the coin.
But my point is- enough with the Jobs quotes- they bring as much credibility to an argument as a Digitimes article.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jetz
I'd argue that Apple does whatever maximizes their profits, not "whatever it feels is right". Usually, it's really good at figuring out what's good for the user and making money in the process. But that's not always true, either.
Yep, you're correct!!!