Huh? Your post makes little sense. As far as resolution goes it doesn't matter how good it is because content is transmitted no higher than 1080i.
I meant for there apps and things would run it. Probably call it a extended retina for extended distance. Instead of 20" it be 20 feet retina graphics. They would do it like there iPad or retina macs. In that case not saying more than 100 pixels per inch and it play video at that.
Plus the tv be less than 10 mm thick so (worlds thinnest). Plus apple might have it require Internet and TV from cable providers with -$5. Then make a remote with a just a button, hold it and Siri. Also Ir for wii like pointing, and duh a microphone if not a nything else. Then IOS and Mac have it with full remote. This is all could be Apple exclusive.
I'm not saying the iPad mini is supposed to. I'm saying it's following its competitors into its market without redefining it. Were there any competitors when the iPod shuffle was released?
Actually they did redefine it. With the iPad mini you get the full iPad experience (as in tablet-optimized apps) in a smaller / lighter package. The other small tablets are just running stretched smartphone apps.
In 2009 when they got back to work on their tablet, Apple tried every imaginable size for the thing. They chose 9.7" because everything else was crap or impossible (for one reason or another) at the time.
I wouldn't imagine they magically chose 9.7" straight off.
Of course they didn't. They tried 20 sizes. From the bio:
"The process began with Jobs and Ive figuring out the right screen size. They had twenty models made—all rounded rectangles, of course—in slightly varying sizes and aspect ratios. Ive laid them out on a table in the design studio, and in the afternoon they would lift the velvet cloth hiding them and play with them. “That’s how we nailed what the screen size was,” Ive said.
As usual Jobs pushed for the purest possible simplicity. That required determining what was the core essence of the device. The answer: the display screen. So the guiding principle was that everything they did had to defer to the screen. “How do we get out of the way so there aren’t a ton of features and buttons that distract from the display?” Ive asked. At every step, Jobs pushed to remove and simplify.
At one point Jobs looked at the model and was slightly dissatisfied. It didn’t feel casual and friendly enough, so that you would naturally scoop it up and whisk it away. Ive put his finger, so to speak, on the problem: They needed to signal that you could grab it with one hand, on impulse. The bottom of the edge needed to be slightly rounded, so that you’d feel comfortable just scooping it up rather than lifting it carefully. That meant engineering had to design the necessary connection ports and buttons in a simple lip that was thin enough to wash away gently underneath."
Frankly, I never believe any of these stories the minute they suggest that Apple is "talking to the cable companies" (the implication being that cable TV will show up on Apple TV or that Apple TV will integrate with your cable box).
It makes no sense to me that Apple TV will have anything to do with traditional cable TV companies or integrate with it in any way. They need the content, but they need it on a new distribution system that will replace cable TV, not augment it. IMO all these stories are fantasy that originates with the cable TV companies and older people who simply can't envision a world without regular old cable TV.
In some ways, I think you have a point, but the reason to talk to the cable channels/networks is they own a lot of the content, but they're not going to let go and leave the hegemony.
It may be just as well, because even the best shows are getting annoying. I doubt there is 15 minutes of unduplicated footage and narration in a half hour. The ads are annoying and the recaps after every ad break get annoying too. Even with a PVR it gets tedious. My PVR Dish has a UI that looks and operates just as poorly as a unit made ten years ago too, the UI would be identical if the PVR feature wasn't there.
With the iPad mini you get the full iPad experience in a smaller / lighter package.
Er, no… It's not the full experience. Something has to give.
Originally Posted by JeffDM
It may be just as well, because even the best shows are getting annoying. I doubt there is 15 minutes of unduplicated footage and narration in a half hour. The ads are annoying and the recaps after every ad break get annoying too. Even with a PVR it gets tedious. My PVR Dish has a UI that looks and operates just as poorly as a unit made ten years ago too, the UI would be identical if the PVR feature wasn't there.
It's a sad state of affairs, in both content and UX. And Apple can only fix the latter.
No, that's called under-thinking. What's the point of even following Apple if you don't care at all what happens?
We know exactly what Steve said. He said it publicly.
sorry bud, we know what he "publicly said". Which has no bearing on the reality of the situation. Nobody will ever know what his true thoughts/sayings/visions were. Case in point, he had said publicly that they would not do a small ipad, yet here we are. Gotta love speculation on this site... fun stuff. but again no bearing on reality.
sorry bud, we know what he "publicly said". Which has no bearing on the reality of the situation. Nobody will ever know what his true thoughts/sayings/visions were. Case in point, he had said publicly that they would not do a small ipad, yet here we are. Gotta love speculation on this site... fun stuff. but again no bearing on reality.
I think they said they wouldn't do a 7" iPad because that's too small for a tablet, and I tend to agree with that. The iPad mini has the area equivalent to larger than an 8" 16:9 tablet. I think iPad mini fits a goldilocks zone for a lot of people.
Apple does seem to dismiss things before going into said market, but a lot of the times, they do air valid concerns that needed to be addressed, which they generally do address them when they enter the market with their own interpretation of the idea.
In some ways, I think you have a point, but the reason to talk to the cable channels/networks is they own a lot of the content, but they're not going to let go and leave the hegemony.
It may be just as well, because even the best shows are getting annoying. I doubt there is 15 minutes of unduplicated footage and narration in a half hour. The ads are annoying and the recaps after every ad break get annoying too. Even with a PVR it gets tedious. My PVR Dish has a UI that looks and operates just as poorly as a unit made ten years ago too, the UI would be identical if the PVR feature wasn't there.
I dunno. Steve said he had cracked the code so to speak with regards to tv. The cable/networks etc... do not necessarily own the content but are issued mechanical license for broadcast from the owners of the publishing, similar deal to the music industry. My thought is he was working the publishing angle to get the content turning the telcos and cable cos into what they really are, just dumb pipes. He was the only one in hollywood with enough "juice" to pull this off. As someone who was in the entertainment biz for over 25 years, from my perspective it was and always has been about the publishing. But like everyone else, just MHO.
sorry bud, we know what he "publicly said". Which has no bearing on the reality of the situation. Nobody will ever know what his true thoughts/sayings/visions were. Case in point, he had said publicly that they would not do a small ipad, yet here we are. Gotta love speculation on this site... fun stuff. but again no bearing on reality.
1) So he's made comments in public that were recorded but you claim these are not "true sayings" despite proof that he made these comments? WTF?
2) He never said Apple would not make a smaller tablet.
I think they said they wouldn't do a 7" iPad because that's too small for a tablet, and I tend to agree with that. The iPad mini has the area equivalent to larger than an 8" 16:9 tablet. I think iPad mini fits a goldilocks zone for a lot of people.
I would agree with the goldilocks remark. but i would counter that the mini is not a "tablet" per se. an old saying comes to mind, mobility IS nobility.
I think they said they wouldn't do a 7" iPad because that's too small for a tablet, and I tend to agree with that. The iPad mini has the area equivalent to larger than an 8" 16:9 tablet. I think iPad mini fits a goldilocks zone for a lot of people.
Apple does seem to dismiss things before going into said market, but a lot of the times, they are valid concerns that needed to be addressed, which they generally do address them when they enter the market with their own interpretation of the idea.
Jobs stated the current 7" tablets would fail... and he was right. The iPad mini has about 40% more display area than 7" tablets which makes it considerably more useful than those tablets. Portability is somewhat less in you are trying to put into a pocket since it's wider but it's also considerably lighter and thinner than those 7" tablets which has its own benefits.
I would agree with the goldilocks remark. but i would counter that the mini is not a "tablet" per se. an old saying comes to mind, mobility IS nobility.
Not a tablet? Further down the rabbit hole we go...
c'mon now Soli, you of all people here should realize that it is all part of dis/mis information. the Apple style. Claim you would never do it, take your time, do it right, then amaze the world.
Not a tablet? Further down the rabbit hole we go...
well, I guess I could have said it better. The original concept of what we call a tablet was based off a laptop (modbook etc...). the 10" ipad changed that view. I would say that the mini (even though a full on pad/tablet whatever) while giving us that kind of power, while fitting in one hand does not "feel" like a tablet. Don't hate, just waiting on mine!
well, I guess I could have said it better. The original concept of what we call a tablet was based off a laptop (modbook etc...). the 10" ipad changed that view. I would say that the mini (even though a full on pad/tablet whatever) while giving us that kind of power, while fitting in one hand does not "feel" like a tablet. Don't hate, just waiting on mine!
I really don't see any need to disavow the term, it simply changed. Your argument would be like saying iPhone really isn't a phone because it's not anything like one of those Bakelite rotary dial devices from decades ago, the idea had gradually taken on a broader and different meaning.
I would argue that the working meaning of what a tablet changed the day Apple announced the iPad. The market share of hybrid/convertible computer tablets was decimated as a result, those devices never really fit the futuristic vision of what a tablet would become.
I really don't see any need to disavow the term, it simply changed. Your argument would be like saying iPhone really isn't a phone because it's not anything like one of those Bakelite rotary dial devices from decades ago, the idea had gradually taken on a broader and different meaning.
I would argue that the working meaning of what a tablet changed the day Apple announced the iPad. The market share of hybrid/convertible computer tablets was decimated as a result, those devices never really fit the futuristic vision of what a tablet would become.
I would not go so far as to say disavow, but I agree in that it changed. As to the phone, from my perspective/use I could argue that it's really not a phone but a pocket mac that makes phone calls. The utility it provides takes it way past the ole bake-o-lite rotary phones (think i have one somewhere), but that is just splitting hairs.
no need to argue the second point. I would concur that the definition of tablet changed with the introduction of iPad. However my remark was about the feel of the device not the "form or function".
Jobs stated the current 7" tablets would fail... and he was right. The iPad mini has about 40% more display area than 7" tablets which makes it considerably more useful than those tablets. Portability is somewhat less in you are trying to put into a pocket since it's wider but it's also considerably lighter and thinner than those 7" tablets which has its own benefits.
Have they really failed? While they not selling as well as iPads they are being purchased in decent amounts.
I would not go so far as to say disavow, but I agree in that it changed. As to the phone, from my perspective/use I could argue that it's really not a phone but a pocket mac that makes phone calls. The utility it provides takes it way past the ole bake-o-lite rotary phones (think i have one somewhere), but that is just splitting hairs.
no need to argue the second point. I would concur that the definition of tablet changed with the introduction of iPad. However my remark was about the feel of the device not the "form or function".
I'd go along with you on the new definition of tablet, but I'd say that the new mini palm device is the real Pad, and the old 10-incher is the Tablet.
Anyway, holding the computer in one hand—one you can read on— is a fundamentally new experience, and should be recognized as a separate device category. If the medium is the message, the package is the experience.
Comments
I meant for there apps and things would run it. Probably call it a extended retina for extended distance. Instead of 20" it be 20 feet retina graphics. They would do it like there iPad or retina macs. In that case not saying more than 100 pixels per inch and it play video at that.
Plus the tv be less than 10 mm thick so (worlds thinnest). Plus apple might have it require Internet and TV from cable providers with -$5. Then make a remote with a just a button, hold it and Siri. Also Ir for wii like pointing, and duh a microphone if not a nything else. Then IOS and Mac have it with full remote. This is all could be Apple exclusive.
Hahaha! That is too funny!
----
Is the word 'condescending' appropriate to label Gazoobee's line here?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
I'm not saying the iPad mini is supposed to. I'm saying it's following its competitors into its market without redefining it. Were there any competitors when the iPod shuffle was released?
Actually they did redefine it. With the iPad mini you get the full iPad experience (as in tablet-optimized apps) in a smaller / lighter package. The other small tablets are just running stretched smartphone apps.
Of course they didn't. They tried 20 sizes. From the bio:
"The process began with Jobs and Ive figuring out the right screen size. They had twenty models made—all rounded rectangles, of course—in slightly varying sizes and aspect ratios. Ive laid them out on a table in the design studio, and in the afternoon they would lift the velvet cloth hiding them and play with them. “That’s how we nailed what the screen size was,” Ive said.
As usual Jobs pushed for the purest possible simplicity. That required determining what was the core essence of the device. The answer: the display screen. So the guiding principle was that everything they did had to defer to the screen. “How do we get out of the way so there aren’t a ton of features and buttons that distract from the display?” Ive asked. At every step, Jobs pushed to remove and simplify.
At one point Jobs looked at the model and was slightly dissatisfied. It didn’t feel casual and friendly enough, so that you would naturally scoop it up and whisk it away. Ive put his finger, so to speak, on the problem: They needed to signal that you could grab it with one hand, on impulse. The bottom of the edge needed to be slightly rounded, so that you’d feel comfortable just scooping it up rather than lifting it carefully. That meant engineering had to design the necessary connection ports and buttons in a simple lip that was thin enough to wash away gently underneath."
In some ways, I think you have a point, but the reason to talk to the cable channels/networks is they own a lot of the content, but they're not going to let go and leave the hegemony.
It may be just as well, because even the best shows are getting annoying. I doubt there is 15 minutes of unduplicated footage and narration in a half hour. The ads are annoying and the recaps after every ad break get annoying too. Even with a PVR it gets tedious. My PVR Dish has a UI that looks and operates just as poorly as a unit made ten years ago too, the UI would be identical if the PVR feature wasn't there.
Originally Posted by Shameer Mulji
With the iPad mini you get the full iPad experience in a smaller / lighter package.
Er, no… It's not the full experience. Something has to give.
Originally Posted by JeffDM
It may be just as well, because even the best shows are getting annoying. I doubt there is 15 minutes of unduplicated footage and narration in a half hour. The ads are annoying and the recaps after every ad break get annoying too. Even with a PVR it gets tedious. My PVR Dish has a UI that looks and operates just as poorly as a unit made ten years ago too, the UI would be identical if the PVR feature wasn't there.
It's a sad state of affairs, in both content and UX. And Apple can only fix the latter.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
No, that's called under-thinking. What's the point of even following Apple if you don't care at all what happens?
We know exactly what Steve said. He said it publicly.
sorry bud, we know what he "publicly said". Which has no bearing on the reality of the situation. Nobody will ever know what his true thoughts/sayings/visions were. Case in point, he had said publicly that they would not do a small ipad, yet here we are. Gotta love speculation on this site... fun stuff. but again no bearing on reality.
I think they said they wouldn't do a 7" iPad because that's too small for a tablet, and I tend to agree with that. The iPad mini has the area equivalent to larger than an 8" 16:9 tablet. I think iPad mini fits a goldilocks zone for a lot of people.
Apple does seem to dismiss things before going into said market, but a lot of the times, they do air valid concerns that needed to be addressed, which they generally do address them when they enter the market with their own interpretation of the idea.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM
In some ways, I think you have a point, but the reason to talk to the cable channels/networks is they own a lot of the content, but they're not going to let go and leave the hegemony.
It may be just as well, because even the best shows are getting annoying. I doubt there is 15 minutes of unduplicated footage and narration in a half hour. The ads are annoying and the recaps after every ad break get annoying too. Even with a PVR it gets tedious. My PVR Dish has a UI that looks and operates just as poorly as a unit made ten years ago too, the UI would be identical if the PVR feature wasn't there.
I dunno. Steve said he had cracked the code so to speak with regards to tv. The cable/networks etc... do not necessarily own the content but are issued mechanical license for broadcast from the owners of the publishing, similar deal to the music industry. My thought is he was working the publishing angle to get the content turning the telcos and cable cos into what they really are, just dumb pipes. He was the only one in hollywood with enough "juice" to pull this off. As someone who was in the entertainment biz for over 25 years, from my perspective it was and always has been about the publishing. But like everyone else, just MHO.
1) So he's made comments in public that were recorded but you claim these are not "true sayings" despite proof that he made these comments? WTF?
2) He never said Apple would not make a smaller tablet.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM
I think they said they wouldn't do a 7" iPad because that's too small for a tablet, and I tend to agree with that. The iPad mini has the area equivalent to larger than an 8" 16:9 tablet. I think iPad mini fits a goldilocks zone for a lot of people.
I would agree with the goldilocks remark. but i would counter that the mini is not a "tablet" per se. an old saying comes to mind, mobility IS nobility.
Jobs stated the current 7" tablets would fail... and he was right. The iPad mini has about 40% more display area than 7" tablets which makes it considerably more useful than those tablets. Portability is somewhat less in you are trying to put into a pocket since it's wider but it's also considerably lighter and thinner than those 7" tablets which has its own benefits.
Not a tablet? Further down the rabbit hole we go...
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
1) So he's made comments in public that were recorded but you claim these are not "true sayings" despite proof that he made these comments? WTF?
2) He never said Apple would not make a smaller tablet.
sorry man, to clarify...
1.) public comments are just that, so much smoke.
2.) see #1
c'mon now Soli, you of all people here should realize that it is all part of dis/mis information. the Apple style. Claim you would never do it, take your time, do it right, then amaze the world.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
Not a tablet? Further down the rabbit hole we go...
well, I guess I could have said it better. The original concept of what we call a tablet was based off a laptop (modbook etc...). the 10" ipad changed that view. I would say that the mini (even though a full on pad/tablet whatever) while giving us that kind of power, while fitting in one hand does not "feel" like a tablet. Don't hate, just waiting on mine!
I really don't see any need to disavow the term, it simply changed. Your argument would be like saying iPhone really isn't a phone because it's not anything like one of those Bakelite rotary dial devices from decades ago, the idea had gradually taken on a broader and different meaning.
I would argue that the working meaning of what a tablet changed the day Apple announced the iPad. The market share of hybrid/convertible computer tablets was decimated as a result, those devices never really fit the futuristic vision of what a tablet would become.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM
I really don't see any need to disavow the term, it simply changed. Your argument would be like saying iPhone really isn't a phone because it's not anything like one of those Bakelite rotary dial devices from decades ago, the idea had gradually taken on a broader and different meaning.
I would argue that the working meaning of what a tablet changed the day Apple announced the iPad. The market share of hybrid/convertible computer tablets was decimated as a result, those devices never really fit the futuristic vision of what a tablet would become.
I would not go so far as to say disavow, but I agree in that it changed. As to the phone, from my perspective/use I could argue that it's really not a phone but a pocket mac that makes phone calls. The utility it provides takes it way past the ole bake-o-lite rotary phones (think i have one somewhere), but that is just splitting hairs.
no need to argue the second point. I would concur that the definition of tablet changed with the introduction of iPad. However my remark was about the feel of the device not the "form or function".
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
They'd disappoint most of us by making a TV.
Like that tragic iPad Mini debacle. /s
Have they really failed? While they not selling as well as iPads they are being purchased in decent amounts.
I'd go along with you on the new definition of tablet, but I'd say that the new mini palm device is the real Pad, and the old 10-incher is the Tablet.
Anyway, holding the computer in one hand—one you can read on— is a fundamentally new experience, and should be recognized as a separate device category. If the medium is the message, the package is the experience.