PDA

View Full Version : Production of 7.85-Inch iPad Reportedly Moving Closer as More Suppliers Named




MacRumors
Mar 5, 2012, 08:42 AM
http://images.macrumors.com/im/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2012/03/05/production-of-7-85-inch-ipad-reportedly-moving-closer-as-more-suppliers-named/)


Digitimes has been one of the biggest sources of rumors regarding a potential "iPad mini" carrying a 7.85-inch screen that the publication says Apple is targeting for release (http://www.macrumors.com/2012/03/01/production-of-7-85-inch-ipad-rumored-for-3q-2012-at-the-earliest/) later this year. Digitimes now points (http://www.digitimes.com/news/a20120305PB200.html) to a new report (http://udn.com/NEWS/STOCK/STO1/6941016.shtml) [Google translation (http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http://udn.com/NEWS/STOCK/STO1/6941016.shtml&hl=en&langpair=auto%7Cen)] from Taiwanese newspaper United Evening News making similar claims and outlining a number of companies making up Apple's supply chain for the device.

According to the report, Apple will be utilizing Pegatron as its assembler for the device, forgoing its main partner Foxconn for this project. Apple and Pegatron do, however, have a long-standing relationship with the assembler already contributing to iPhone production and rumored at several points to be involved in iPad 3 production as well.

http://images.macrumors.com/article-new/2012/03/ipad_mini_mockup_iphone.jpg
Mockup (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/12/23/this-is-what-a-7-85-inch-ipad-looks-and-feels-like/) of 7.85-inch iPad next to an iPhone
On the display side, the report claims that LG Display will be responsible for 70-75% of the workload for the smaller iPad, with AU Optronics handling the remainder. Samsung, which is a key part of Apple's supply chain but with which Apple is currently engaged in a massive patent dispute, has reportedly been shut out of display production for the new device. The report also claims that Radiant Opto-Electronics and Forhouse will be contributing backlight components for the 7.85-inch iPad.

The newspaper had previously named (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/10/18/ipad-mini-rumors-revived-with-claims-of-7-85-inch-screen/) LG and AU Optronics as display suppliers for the device, claiming in October that Apple was planning to launch the smaller iPad early this year. The Wall Street Journal weighed in last month (http://www.macrumors.com/2012/02/14/apple-working-with-suppliers-on-8-inch-ipad/) with its own claims that Apple was working with those companies on the project, but noted that there is no guarantee Apple will ever release the device.

Article Link: Production of 7.85-Inch iPad Reportedly Moving Closer as More Suppliers Named (http://www.macrumors.com/2012/03/05/production-of-7-85-inch-ipad-reportedly-moving-closer-as-more-suppliers-named/)



Bchagey
Mar 5, 2012, 08:48 AM
I doubt it.

applefan289
Mar 5, 2012, 08:49 AM
Sorry, I'm not buying a smaller tablet.

Patriot24
Mar 5, 2012, 08:49 AM
...the publication says Apple is targeting for release later this year.

"It will be called 'iPhone 5'"

ThatsMeRight
Mar 5, 2012, 08:50 AM
It's great for the people who want a smaller tablet, but I think they have nailed it with the current 9.7" display. It's not too big, but not too small either. The same goes for Samsung and Asus by the way, who also have excellent screen diagonals around the 10"-mark.

GoGa
Mar 5, 2012, 08:50 AM
What is peoples obsession with having bigger phones and smaller tablets? I don't get it.

shadowkhas
Mar 5, 2012, 08:51 AM
-

Glideslope
Mar 5, 2012, 08:51 AM
iNote. It will sell Millions. DO NOT underestimate the power of "purse compliant". :apple:

BobbyRond
Mar 5, 2012, 08:51 AM
I hope this doesn't happen. Not only for the unnecessary product diversification that got to Apple when John Sculley was in charge.

Also I hope this doesn't happen for all those developers out there having to resize their apps once again.

coolspot18
Mar 5, 2012, 08:51 AM
The 10" iPad is great for home use, but I think a 8" iPad is better for on the go.

JGowan
Mar 5, 2012, 08:53 AM
I don't know why people poopoo the idea of a cheaper, smaller iPad. One of the main reasons why people are buying the Kindle Fire is for their kids. They have smaller fingers AND at $200, they can justify buying a tablet for the child. I know someone very happy with the purchase because of Amazon Prime and the free movies and tv shows that you can stream with the annual subscription to the program.

I think children need to be addicted to these things too. They are Apple's future revenue! :D

ILikeTurtles
Mar 5, 2012, 08:53 AM
And somewhere Steve Jobs is spinning in his grave.

Bchagey
Mar 5, 2012, 08:54 AM
What is peoples obsession with having bigger phones and smaller tablets? I don't get it.

Unfortunately true

Glideslope
Mar 5, 2012, 08:54 AM
The 10" iPad is great for home use, but I think a 8" iPad is better for on the go.

....and there are millions who see it the same way. :apple:

godrifle
Mar 5, 2012, 08:55 AM
...how the current iPad 2 resolution works out in terms of PPI for a smaller tablet of this size? If high enough, devs would not have to add yet another set of graphics.

Glideslope
Mar 5, 2012, 08:55 AM
And somewhere Steve Jobs is spinning in his grave.

Not. He was involved with this. :apple:

Consultant
Mar 5, 2012, 08:56 AM
Unlikely.

Full size magazines are just about readable on iPad.

Anything smaller and you either have to see everything at 1/2 size or scroll ALOT.

pmz
Mar 5, 2012, 08:57 AM
I'm sure Digitimes is wrong, but...


Its possible Apple thinks the iPad mini could do for iPad, what the iPod mini did for iPod. The iPod mini hit the right price point, and with limited storage and screen size, blew the iPod market into the stratosphere.

A $199 iPad mini, could do that too. It wouldn't be for the traditional iPad buyer, but neither was the iPod mini for the iPod buyer.

BJMRamage
Mar 5, 2012, 08:57 AM
What is peoples obsession with having bigger phones and smaller tablets? I don't get it.

QFT.

i was thinking about this exactly.

Gasu E.
Mar 5, 2012, 08:57 AM
The 10" iPad is great for home use, but I think a 8" iPad is better for on the go.

Agreed. I have quite a few pockets in which I can stuff my 7" Kindle, and I can alwasy hand it to my wife to stuff in her purse. It's a huge advantage. I much prefer to read as a time killer rather than play Angry Birds.

Tinyluph
Mar 5, 2012, 08:57 AM
When I first saw an iPad in real life I was actually surprised how small the thing really was. The even smaller form factors seem entirely pointless to me.

Fizzoid
Mar 5, 2012, 08:58 AM
Sorry, I'm not buying a smaller tablet.
Oh no! Better call Apple and cancel them then!

mdntcallr
Mar 5, 2012, 08:58 AM
for those of you questioning why Apple ought to do this is:

1- One size does not fit all, many smaller tablets are more affordable and work well.

2- kids can play and do well with smaller sizes, in my house, it would be great to have a smaller device my kids can share to learn with and more.

3- cost. these devices cost alot, more than some competing full sized laptops. why not do it smaller and bring prices down. people need more cost effective options.

Lesser Evets
Mar 5, 2012, 08:58 AM
This rumor always seems odd for a variety of reasons.

I can understand smaller hands wanting a smaller device, but the regular is good for most everyone.

When you get a smaller iPad you get less battery, probably less hardware, and most likely less function. Why? A travel-sized iPad? Whu?

If the rumors of iPad4 in October are coming true, perhaps the iPad4 has such expanded capability that it will bridge the market to home computer function and make room for a smaller iPad that works like these last iPads/iPod Touches. Thus a release of such a device later in the year.

Rafterman
Mar 5, 2012, 08:58 AM
And somewhere Steve Jobs is spinning in his grave.

Since it takes a year or more and several mockups to produce a new device, I'm sure Steve Jobs had input into this, if not actually authorizing it.

BruiserB
Mar 5, 2012, 08:58 AM
I think this would be a great addition to the lineup. Especially with Apple pushing into the education market with textbooks. Everyone was questioning how schools are supposed to buy $500 iPads for all of the students....but if the cost starts to get down to the $200 level, it becomes a lot more attractive.

d0vr
Mar 5, 2012, 08:59 AM
It's great for the people who want a smaller tablet, but I think they have nailed it with the current 9.7" display. It's not too big, but not too small either. The same goes for Samsung and Asus by the way, who also have excellent screen diagonals around the 10"-mark.

I have the opposite problem, it's right in the middle of a big enough display and a portable enough device. I want a 8" device and a slightly bigger ProPad style device.

Are the rumors still saying that a mini iPad device would have the same resolution as the current iPads?

farleysmaster
Mar 5, 2012, 09:01 AM
Who would have thought it would be another post from digitimes?

charlituna
Mar 5, 2012, 09:02 AM
"It will be called 'iPhone 5'"

Try more like the iPod touch 5. The phone will stay the same size for the ease of one handed use etc. THe touch will get bigger to go with focusing on games etc and as a kind of iPad mini for the kiddies.

----------

Who would have thought it would be another post from digitimes?

Of course, now we are do for another iPad Pro rumor as well.

Plus how about that name dropping of local companies. That doesn't reek of trying to pump up anyone by association now does it.

derek1984
Mar 5, 2012, 09:02 AM
And somewhere Steve Jobs is spinning in his grave.


He left Apple with a 4 year plan. If this smaller iPad happens, it was his idea.

ri0ku
Mar 5, 2012, 09:03 AM
I think its quite possible we will see a "Mini iPad" nearly every other Apple line up has some sort of "Mini" version, Mac mini, Macbook Air, iPod nano (mini).

Especially with the pushing of texts books for education this would make a lot of sense. People say "but steve said that will never happen" etc but he also said that about a netbook. (Granted I know the macbook air is not a netbook but didn't he say an 11" screen is useless for such a machine?) yet we have one now...

Gasu E.
Mar 5, 2012, 09:03 AM
What is peoples obsession with having bigger phones and smaller tablets? I don't get it.

We hear this line every time Apple is about to introduce a new class of iProduct.

I think it's been amply explained that many people value portability, and there is a continuous trade-off between functionality and portability. The sweet spot depends on the individual and the application, and, more so, what applicatiions the individual considers to be most critical.

charlituna
Mar 5, 2012, 09:06 AM
Not. He was involved with this. :apple:

And he said it would never happen.

Some folks want to believe that Tim Cook is just tossing all things Steve because he can now that STeve is dead. They forget that tech takes at least 3 years from idea to product, often as much as 10 years. Everything we are seeing now was being worked on before Steve went on leave in Jan 2011. Including the no 7 inch or smaller iPad. The reports are that Apple needs it to compete with the Tab, Note and Kindle Fire but the current iPad is killing all of them in sales so the reports are wrong. Apple doesn't need to build to compete.

Bluesnoops
Mar 5, 2012, 09:07 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0_1 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile/9A405)

Fall Timeframe, I think it's the new iPod Touch on Steroids

Four oF NINE
Mar 5, 2012, 09:08 AM
Call it the Newton :cool:

psxp
Mar 5, 2012, 09:10 AM
I bet its the Ipod Touch HD ;)

ctdonath
Mar 5, 2012, 09:10 AM
What is peoples obsession with having bigger phones and smaller tablets? I don't get it.

Confluence of human interface limits. We want stuff as small as physically possible, yet our fingers & eyes demand a minimum size. Inflection point is an obnoxious 7", too small for comfortable typing & reading but too big for comfortable pocket carry.

pmau
Mar 5, 2012, 09:10 AM
QFT.

i was thinking about this exactly.

It's because they want bigger phones ;)

irnchriz
Mar 5, 2012, 09:10 AM
Wont happen.

Range will be:

iPod Touch from $199
iPad 2 (8GB Budget model) $299
iPad 3 from $399


No 7" model.

charlituna
Mar 5, 2012, 09:11 AM
for those of you questioning why Apple ought to do this is:

1- One size does not fit all, many smaller tablets are more affordable and work well.



when has Apple ever made items to try to fit every market. Heck they have killed products for markets faster. Like the Xserve, Final Cut Studio, it seems the Mac Pro.


2- kids can play and do well with smaller sizes,


Get them a touch if you insist on them having something smaller than the iPad.


3- cost. these devices cost alot, more than some competing full sized laptops. why not do it smaller and bring prices down. people need more cost effective options.

Cost Effective doesn't equal cheaper and Apple has never been about catering to the cheap market, especially with designing products just for them. People buy at the price that Apple chooses, why change that. The best they will do for the 'needs to be cheaper' market is perhaps that 8GB model for the ultra light users and the 16 GB at a lower cost. Both of which will just be from the iPad 2 lineup a kin to the keeping of the 3gs when the iPhone 4 and iPhone 4s came out.

dreamtenstudios
Mar 5, 2012, 09:11 AM
If they were to sell this with a hybrid lcd/e-ink display, I'd sell my kindle touch and buy it immediately.

charlituna
Mar 5, 2012, 09:12 AM
I think this would be a great addition to the lineup. Especially with Apple pushing into the education market with textbooks. Everyone was questioning how schools are supposed to buy $500 iPads for all of the students....but if the cost starts to get down to the $200 level, it becomes a lot more attractive.

A 7 inch iPad doesn't serve the use well and if Apple wants to make the iPads less costly for that use then they can just discount them lower. Or offer them on a lease program if the schools want to be the ones to own the items so they can justify putting on restrictions etc.

david77
Mar 5, 2012, 09:13 AM
iNote. It will sell Millions. DO NOT underestimate the power of "purse compliant". :apple:

This is a really good point. I'm still skeptical though.

BowTheMan89
Mar 5, 2012, 09:13 AM
And he said it would never happen.

Some folks want to believe that Tim Cook is just tossing all things Steve because he can now that STeve is dead. They forget that tech takes at least 3 years from idea to product, often as much as 10 years. Everything we are seeing now was being worked on before Steve went on leave in Jan 2011. Including the no 7 inch or smaller iPad. The reports are that Apple needs it to compete with the Tab, Note and Kindle Fire but the current iPad is killing all of them in sales so the reports are wrong. Apple doesn't need to build to compete.

yes but apple is missing the huge market that isnt willing the shell out $600 for a tablet. As verified by many posts on this thread, those who buy the more expensive 10in iPad are not necessarily those who would buy the 7.5in iPad, therefore, apple wouldn't be stealing its own customers.

I think it looks great, i love my Kindle Fire, but would gladly jump to a smaller, less expensive iPad if given the opportunity.

charlituna
Mar 5, 2012, 09:14 AM
(Granted I know the macbook air is not a netbook but didn't he say an 11" screen is useless for such a machine?) yet we have one now...

Nope, Steve never mentioned the screen size as an issue. Because it wasn't. Which is why he picked to use it for the Air.

sammich
Mar 5, 2012, 09:14 AM
I'm probably beating a dead horse here, but seeing as how inaccurate DigiTimes is, why are you reporting it? Right, because it makes you money.

Tell you what, to make it easier on yourself, just make your own site with random bits of 'rumour' with almost no basis to it's truth and then you can refer to that site as a 'source' and almost literally print money whenever there's a slow news day.

Oh wait.

appahappa
Mar 5, 2012, 09:14 AM
I hope this doesn't happen. Not only for the unnecessary product diversification that got to Apple when John Sculley was in charge.

Also I hope this doesn't happen for all those developers out there having to resize their apps once again.


You actually don't have to resize anything. The smaller iPad could easily have the same resolution the current 10" iPad has.

douglaswilliams
Mar 5, 2012, 09:14 AM
If this device existed as stated, it would have a smaller ppi than the original iPhone. It appears to me that Apple is done with low pixel density displays.

Rumored Small iPad: 1024*768 @ 7.85 = 163.06 ppi

iPad 1 & 2: 1024*768 @ 9.7 = 131.96 ppi
iPad 3: 2048*1536 @ 9.7 = 263.92 ppi

iPhone: 480x320 @ 3.5 = 164.83 ppi
iPhone 4: 960*640 @ 3.5 = 329.65 ppi


It makes more sense and seems more likely to me to double the iPhone 4's resolution in both directions, thus:

More Likely Small iPad: 1920x1280 @ 7.85 = 293.96 ppi

This would be slightly higher than the iPad 3, but slightly less than the iPhone 4. Right where it should be based on it's size, and viewing distance from your eyes. Plus developers still get the whole benefit of being able to easily remake apps by doubling the pixels on their iPhone 4 app screens.

It's just logical. Can I get some props for that at least?

RHatton
Mar 5, 2012, 09:15 AM
The 10" iPad is great for home use, but I think a 8" iPad is better for on the go.

No.

The iPad is a mobile device designed to fill the gap between smartphone and notebook. Leaving it at home where your computer is completely defeats the purpose. This is another unreliable rumor like the rest of them. They spent months figuring out the perfect size for the iPad, I highly doubt they are second guessing it because of flimsy sales of a few android tablets.

iCarabma
Mar 5, 2012, 09:17 AM
I don't know why people poopoo the idea of a cheaper, smaller iPad. One of the main reasons why people are buying the Kindle Fire is for their kids. They have smaller fingers AND at $200, they can justify buying a tablet for the child. I know someone very happy with the purchase because of Amazon Prime and the free movies and tv shows that you can stream with the annual subscription to the program.

I think children need to be addicted to these things too. They are Apple's future revenue! :D

Edit: If this DOES materialize, you can bet Steve Jobs knew and approved of it before his passing. I read somewhere that he Apple had about 5 years worth of stuff in their plans before he was too sick to be looking at such.

I agree. IF they do this, I would be willing to bet that it's not a smaller iPad at all. I bet it's branded as a iPod Touch, and marketed as a gaming machine for teens/children.

Two quick points:

1. This is Digi-times, they are so wrong so often that I would be more inclined to believe a mid-sized tablet if they were reporting Apple would never make one.

2. Can we please lay off the Steve would be rolling in his grave argument on every rumor? If he had died before they released the first iPod Video you would have all said it then because Steve once said, "Nobody wants video on an iPod". He is gone, we all miss him... let it go.

charlituna
Mar 5, 2012, 09:19 AM
yes but apple is missing the huge market that isnt willing the shell out $600 for a tablet. As verified by many posts on this thread, those who buy the more expensive 10in iPad are not necessarily those who would buy the 7.5in iPad, therefore, apple wouldn't be stealing its own customers.


Correct but how big really is that market. I would hazard not as big as folks think. And then there's the folks that buy something like the Fire, hate it and return it within a week to more often than not, get an iPad. I've seen tons of comments all over various boards to that same effect. yes some of them are buying refurbs to spend a little less money but it's not that much less.

And given that the iPad sells millions hand over fist, I don't think that Apple is really worried about those smaller products etc. Or the "lost" market at this point. Not in the sense of trying to make a product for them. It's better for them to keep their production lines all the same and find ways to encourage those folks to spend the money on what is offered. With things like electronic textbooks for their kiddies. If a school says you must have an iPad, you must have an iPad.

nickgri
Mar 5, 2012, 09:19 AM
Make the bezel smaller-we don't need all that much edge for a thumb. That way we get a bigger screen on a smaller tablet. How about one that folds with a barely visible line opened-we can put up with that for the convenience. A thin flexible keyboard flap cover? Pico projection. Iphone built in? Capture ads on the tv and go directly to the website-advertisers will pay millions for that-send me one of those Apple when you use this!

JGowan
Mar 5, 2012, 09:19 AM
If this DOES materialize, you can bet Steve Jobs knew and approved of it before his passing. I read somewhere that he Apple had about 5 years worth of stuff in their plans before he was too sick to be looking at such.

Also -- on that earnings call where Jobs famously said,...

Well, one could increase the resolution of the display to make up for some of the difference. It is meaningless, unless your tablet also includes sandpaper, so that the user can sand down their fingers to around one quarter of the present size.

... that seems quite the thing that Steve WOULD say to divert Apple customers from even considering something smaller. I think it's right up there with Steve dismissing Movie rentals for iPod because it was too hard to watch movies on the iPod — or — the no tablet statements ("no one reads anymore") —— Only to later offer a video iPod and sell movies for them and of course, the iPad with its eReading capability. Genius!


And he (Jobs) said it would never happen.

Some folks want to believe that Tim Cook is just tossing all things Steve because he can now that Steve is dead. They forget that tech takes at least 3 years from idea to product...I love Steve Jobs (even his memory), but we all know that Steve said a lot of negative stuff as I mentioned just above to keep people focused on his current product and not be concerned with future stuff. Otherwise people will just wait until they can get the one with X. Also, I think, in this case especially, you don't need "at least 3 years from idea to product" at all. Jobs says "at some point next year, do a smaller 7" iPad" -- boom -- it gets done. You already have the tech, the hardware nailed down for the big one, the software -- why do you need 3 years? Don't agree at all. The original iPod took a year or less.

robeddie
Mar 5, 2012, 09:19 AM
Unlikely.

Full size magazines are just about readable on iPad.

Anything smaller and you either have to see everything at 1/2 size or scroll ALOT.

How on earth could 7" be too small? Your friggin phone is half that size and uses the same OS!!!

gadget123
Mar 5, 2012, 09:19 AM
The people saying "I'm not buying a smaller tablet" well nobody is asking you to.

Apple will be doing this to stop people going with cheaper, smaller Android tablets. If they can get a better device from Apple for a little bit extra cash they will go with a smaller Ipad.

For real tech fans is it needed? No definitely not but it's a low end device. Clearly Apple need a strategy of getting cheaper devices to stop competition. It's not been the Apple way but I think we will see a mini Iphone too.

Personally I'd like to see an Iphone Nano, the Ipod touch go 3G and Ipad mini but under a much cooler name. Maybe Ipad "light". I'd buy none of these but they will stop all competition.

markm929
Mar 5, 2012, 09:20 AM
Could this not be just a spin-up of more "display" pads (placed near the items to showcase their specs, etc.) that are used in the ever increasing numbers of Apple stores? And with the forthcoming addition of "stores within stores" (i.e. Target, etc.), could they not also be thinking of placing the "display" pads in them as well? Those "display" pads are a bit smaller than an iPad, no?


Just a thought...

robeddie
Mar 5, 2012, 09:22 AM
Well, one could increase the resolution of the display to make up for some of the difference. It is meaningless, unless your tablet also includes sandpaper, so that the user can sand down their fingers to around one quarter of the present size.[/INDENT]



And he said that when they already had the iphone out! which is already smaller! I've heard that quote and still just don't get what Jobs was smoking that day.

PracticalMac
Mar 5, 2012, 09:22 AM
I WILL buy one.

-1 or +1 me, it's simply what I want, and I do not understand why some of you simply cannot believe I will buy one.

As it is, I have a co-worker who also wants a smaller model.


Parting note: How well would Kindle Fire sell if their was a smaller, less expensive, version of iPad?

Glideslope
Mar 5, 2012, 09:22 AM
And he said it would never happen.

Some folks want to believe that Tim Cook is just tossing all things Steve because he can now that STeve is dead. They forget that tech takes at least 3 years from idea to product, often as much as 10 years. Everything we are seeing now was being worked on before Steve went on leave in Jan 2011. Including the no 7 inch or smaller iPad. The reports are that Apple needs it to compete with the Tab, Note and Kindle Fire but the current iPad is killing all of them in sales so the reports are wrong. Apple doesn't need to build to compete.

Apple can and will be successful with a 7.8". Simply gives consumers another choice in the same category. Nothing wrong with Apple controlling 80% of the 7" & 10" market in 2014. Don't be surprised if the iPhone 5 is still under 4".

Don't look at it as Apple Competing. Look at it as Apple providing more choices. This is always a good thing. :apple:

Ciclismo
Mar 5, 2012, 09:23 AM
What's the difference between Digitimes and a broken clock?

At least a broken clock is right twice a day.

GenesisST
Mar 5, 2012, 09:23 AM
And somewhere Steve Jobs is spinning in his grave.

Plug in a power generator!

GekkePrutser
Mar 5, 2012, 09:24 AM
If this device existed as stated, it would have a smaller ppi than the original iPhone. It appears to me that Apple is done with low pixel density displays.

Rumored Small iPad: 1024*768 @ 7.85 = 163.06 ppi

[...]

It makes more sense and seems more likely to me to double the iPhone 4's resolution in both directions, thus:

More Likely Small iPad: 1920x1280 @ 7.85 = 293.96 ppi


I don't think so. It would introduce yet another form factor for developers.. Resulting in many to leave their apps unsupported (same as with Android apps for devices with 'weird' resolutions). Also, 1920x1280 is still not at a 4:3 aspect ratio so it would introduce a new widescreen form factor as well.

I think it will be either 1024x768 or 2048x1536. But I'd bet on 1024x768 for the first revision. It's still a higher DPI than the iPad 1/2 because of the smaller size and less than the retina 9.7", which will remain the 'premium' model. If the 7" is going to cost less, the lower specs would be easily justified.

Edit: Huh, why does my post appear before the one I replied to???

douglaswilliams
Mar 5, 2012, 09:24 AM
Are the rumors still saying that a mini iPad device would have the same resolution as the current iPads?

If this device had the same resolution as the current iPad, it would have a smaller ppi than the original iPhone. It appears to me that Apple is done with low pixel density displays.

Rumored Small iPad: 1024*768 @ 7.85 = 163.06 ppi

iPad 1 & 2: 1024*768 @ 9.7 = 131.96 ppi
iPad 3: 2048*1536 @ 9.7 = 263.92 ppi

iPhone: 480x320 @ 3.5 = 164.83 ppi
iPhone 4: 960*640 @ 3.5 = 329.65 ppi


It makes more sense and seems more likely to me to double the iPhone 4's resolution in both directions, thus:

More Likely Small iPad: 1920x1280 @ 7.85 = 293.96 ppi

This would make it slightly higher than the iPad 3, but slightly less than the iPhone 4. Right where it should be based on it's size, and viewing distance from your eyes. Plus developers still get the whole benefit of being able to easily remake apps by doubling the pixels on their iPhone 4 apps.

Blakjack
Mar 5, 2012, 09:24 AM
They arent making a smaller device.

If the smaller one lacks certain features, I could kind of believe it, but if its just a smaller one that does everything the 9.7 does, this rumor is unbelievable.

A 9.7 inch device is wonderful, but if buying a smaller ipad with the same features will afford me the opportunity to pay less, then Im going smaller. And this is why I dont believe they are working on a smaller ipad. Millions of people will go for the smaller iPad because its cheaper.

And there are what, 16-18 different iPad models already!! Why add to an already rediculous number, especially when they are already breaking records selling this thing.

if it aint broke, dont fix it. I mean there is absolutely NO REASON to create another kind of iPad. No reason whatsoever. Just because there are people who are enjoying the size of that cheap ars, crappy Kindle tablet doesnt mean Apple has to build a smaller tablet. Amazon hasnt shown any interest in battleing the iPad feature for feature. iPads are selling by the boatloads and there is no sign that that will change anytime soon.

Im sure they may have a smaller tablet in their lab and they may continue to study and pnder the idea. Thats what they are supposed to do, but to actually release one now just doesnt make any sense. And what also doesnt make any sense is the idea that it would be released around christmas time. Im sure that would disrupt the 9.7 sales around the biggest time of the year. This rumor urks me on so many levels.

Viziony
Mar 5, 2012, 09:24 AM
Personally. I really hope this rumor is true. I would love a smaller form iPad to compliment the bigger one. Just last week I went to the Verizon store to review the Samsung Galaxy 7.7 tablet. It was OK, I was never a big fan of the droid o/s. But for a price tag of 699$ w/o the contract for a 16gb tablet is OUTRAGEOUS.

the iPad is a great tool for around the house but not really for use on the train or on the go. It's just too big.

Come on 7" iPad! I would get it in a heart beat.

BruiserB
Mar 5, 2012, 09:24 AM
It's just logical. Can I get some props for that at least?

Props to you on the logic.

The only reason I don't think they'd do that is if they are truly trying to make this a low cost entry level machine, they wouldn't invest in a super great display. And this is a resolution that already has established apps. Then if people really want a retina iPad as well, they have to buy the second one.

Bear
Mar 5, 2012, 09:25 AM
To toss another thought out there...

What if this is the remote for the rumored Apple TV? At that point selling it separately makes sense since it's already in production.

I doubt it.Doubt all you want. It will or won't happen regardless of your doubts.
iNote. It will sell Millions. DO NOT underestimate the power of "purse compliant". :apple:This.

The 10" iPad is great for home use, but I think a 8" iPad is better for on the go.Also this.

...
When you get a smaller iPad you get less battery, probably less hardware, and most likely less function. Why? A travel-sized iPad? Whu?
...I would expect a 7" iPod released later this year to have at least as much functionality as the iPad2 and between the smaller display and battery advances, could have a similar battery run time.

And a 7" iPad with the same functionality and screen resolution as the iPad2 will be minimal impact on application developers.

appahappa
Mar 5, 2012, 09:26 AM
yes but apple is missing the huge market that isnt willing the shell out $600 for a tablet. As verified by many posts on this thread, those who buy the more expensive 10in iPad are not necessarily those who would buy the 7.5in iPad, therefore, apple wouldn't be stealing its own customers.

I think it looks great, i love my Kindle Fire, but would gladly jump to a smaller, less expensive iPad if given the opportunity.


Huge market doesn't matter. Even market share actually doesn't matter. I think that's why apple is so successful. They target premium markets where you get the biggest profit margin per sold product. Let the other manufacturers fight the "cheap war". I don't think Kindle Fire is very profitable for Amazon.

ri0ku
Mar 5, 2012, 09:26 AM
what's the difference between digitimes and a broken clock?

At least a broken clock is right twice a day.

zing!

PracticalMac
Mar 5, 2012, 09:27 AM
What is peoples obsession with having bigger phones and smaller tablets? I don't get it.

Since you don't get it, why bother posting about it?
Announcing to the world you don't get it?

akbarali.ch
Mar 5, 2012, 09:28 AM
I guess it would double as remote for Apple TV. I dont think something like Siri will work with TV directly, voice of the TV will interfere with Users voice commands. I think they'll combine this small tablet to browse the content by gesture/Voice and play it on the apple TV. Similar to like many remotes currently available on the appstore.

milo
Mar 5, 2012, 09:28 AM
What is peoples obsession with having bigger phones and smaller tablets? I don't get it.

It doesn't matter if you get it. If millions of people want to buy a smaller, cheaper tablet, Apple's options are to sell to that market or to sit on their hands and let Amazon sell millions of those.

Different consumers like different things, it's not "obsession" it's just personal preference.

Bear
Mar 5, 2012, 09:29 AM
Huge market doesn't matter. Even market share actually doesn't matter. I think that's why apple is so successful. They target premium markets where you get the biggest profit margin per sold product. Let the other manufacturers fight the "cheap war". I don't think Kindle Fire is very profitable for Amazon.A Kindle Fire is what $199*(US)? A 7" iPad will probably come in around $299(US). Apple will make a profit on it.


What is peoples obsession with having bigger phones and smaller tablets? I don't get it.I don't want a bigger phone. I just want an iPad at a size that is more portable and easier to use in odd locations.

Chevelle
Mar 5, 2012, 09:32 AM
Seems like a great idea for Apple and I don't know why people are so agitated by this idea. A smaller Ipad is perfect for on the go, kids, people who don't want to spend what a full size Ipad cost, etc. It's the same reason they made Ipod minis and look how well those did. They make different sized laptops, and the 13" MBP sells very well even though there's a 15" on the market. Ipads and tablets are the consumer computing future. They are already replacing laptops for many, and more options from Apple in the tablet market will open themselves to a greater market. Some of you may not want an Ipad mini personally, but as a business strategy to enter new markets it seems like it makes perfect sense.

BowTheMan89
Mar 5, 2012, 09:32 AM
I don't think so. It would introduce yet another form factor for developers.. Resulting in many to leave their apps unsupported (same as with Android apps for devices with 'weird' resolutions). Also, 1920x1280 is still not at a 4:3 aspect ratio so it would introduce a new widescreen form factor as well.

I think it will be either 1024x768 or 2048x1536. But I'd bet on 1024x768 for the first revision. It's still a higher DPI than the iPad 1/2 because of the smaller size and less than the retina 9.7", which will remain the 'premium' model. If the 7" is going to cost less, the lower specs would be easily justified.

Edit: Huh, why does my post appear before the one I replied to???

The developers make money off selling their apps on APPLE'S app store. Apple shouldn't care whether they have to spend some extra time tweaking resolutions. These devices sell to millions of people, developers would be stupid to say, "nah, im not messing with it again, later apple".

If the devs did refuse to create another form factor (which they wont), apple could just threaten to drop the app from the store, and they would scramble like mice to fix it. 25billion app downloads, no developer would say no to those kind of numbers.

tonytiger13
Mar 5, 2012, 09:32 AM
If this device existed as stated, it would have a smaller ppi than the original iPhone. It appears to me that Apple is done with low pixel density displays.

Rumored Small iPad: 1024*768 @ 7.85 = 163.06 ppi

iPad 1 & 2: 1024*768 @ 9.7 = 131.96 ppi
iPad 3: 2048*1536 @ 9.7 = 263.92 ppi

iPhone: 480x320 @ 3.5 = 164.83 ppi
iPhone 4: 960*640 @ 3.5 = 329.65 ppi


It makes more sense and seems more likely to me to double the iPhone 4's resolution in both directions, thus:

More Likely Small iPad: 1920x1280 @ 7.85 = 293.96 ppi

This would be slightly higher than the iPad 3, but slightly less than the iPhone 4. Right where it should be based on it's size, and viewing distance from your eyes. Plus developers still get the whole benefit of being able to easily remake apps by doubling the pixels on their iPhone 4 app screens.

It's just logical. Can I get some props for that at least?

Well done. I can see this happening if the iPad mini does come to fruition. Doubling iPhone apps would be easy enough. BUT, and iPad mini would be expected to run iPad Apps and downsizing those would be rough (if aiming for the 1920x1280). I expect a 7.85" iPod touch instead capable of using iBooks Textbooks.

dBeats
Mar 5, 2012, 09:32 AM
And somewhere Steve Jobs is spinning in his grave.

I think he said, "Over my dead body..." Conspiracy anyone? :p

16shatzerj
Mar 5, 2012, 09:34 AM
Hopefully this is true, so I can finalley buy an iPad for a cheap price. :D

Frankied22
Mar 5, 2012, 09:35 AM
Digitimes is such garbage. Most of their posts are ridiculous.

Konrad9
Mar 5, 2012, 09:35 AM
He left Apple with a 4 year plan. If this smaller iPad happens, it was his idea.

Or, you know, he approved it. Bit silly to think he came up with the idea for every single product Apple makes.

dBeats
Mar 5, 2012, 09:36 AM
I can accept that others may find this attractive, but I just don't get the "too big to be a phone, too small to be a full time device" form factor. The current iPad size is great for home use, plane use, day trip use where my laptop is overkill. But on the go, I use a phone, something that I can pull out of my front pocket in seconds. If it can't fit in my pocket, it might as well be 10". If you're a big paperback reader or small book form person, maybe this is more appealing. I just can't imaging reading a magazine on that thing.

PracticalMac
Mar 5, 2012, 09:39 AM
Unlikely.

Full size magazines are just about readable on iPad.

Anything smaller and you either have to see everything at 1/2 size or scroll ALOT.

That is, IF one will use it to read magazines.


It seems a lot of people expect everyone to use the iPad the same way they do.

miutschbubi
Mar 5, 2012, 09:40 AM
It´s gonna be the remote of the iTV and not an iPad.

Dorje Sylas
Mar 5, 2012, 09:41 AM
I read "Digitimes now points[...]" and stopped.

Digitime TS;DR. (To Stupid; Didn't Read)

Digitimes can put out "story" after story after link bait, but doing so won't make it happen.

douglaswilliams
Mar 5, 2012, 09:41 AM
Props to you on the logic.

The only reason I don't think they'd do that is if they are truly trying to make this a low cost entry level machine, they wouldn't invest in a super great display. And this is a resolution that already has established apps. Then if people really want a retina iPad as well, they have to buy the second one.

I understand the case you are making for the cheaper, entry level device. But is there a history of Apple making "low cost entry level" devices? I'm no Apple historian, but it seems that even their cheapest laptops are still expensive.

It would be great if they would make something so the poorer folks could enjoy Apple's great devices, I just don't think that is their usual way of doing things.

Side note: this past week I sold my iPad 1 for $305 to a lady with five kids who works at a taco stand. That is a lot so spend when you work at a taco stand and have five major responsibilities running around the house. For some reason, poor people still cough up the dough for Apple.

iMaven
Mar 5, 2012, 09:44 AM
What is peoples obsession with having bigger phones and smaller tablets? I don't get it.

I think some people are looking for a larger all-in-one device. They want the luxury of a larger screen, but the convenience of a phone.

xFenixKnightx
Mar 5, 2012, 09:47 AM
for those of you questioning why Apple ought to do this is:

1- One size does not fit all, many smaller tablets are more affordable and work well.

2- kids can play and do well with smaller sizes, in my house, it would be great to have a smaller device my kids can share to learn with and more.

3- cost. these devices cost alot, more than some competing full sized laptops. why not do it smaller and bring prices down. people need more cost effective options.

Golf Clap! +1

paul4339
Mar 5, 2012, 09:48 AM
What is peoples obsession with having bigger phones and smaller tablets? I don't get it.

Because, there's probably an unfilled gap.

There's people that find the iPad a bit too large to be highly mobile (conveniently carry around) ... they find a smartphone too small. Like laptops and iPods, I think various size tablets is just a natural evolution to satisfy the market... market timing, of course, is also important (even if you have a hit, and you release it too early, it can/will fail).

.

iAppl3Fan
Mar 5, 2012, 09:49 AM
what is peoples obsession with having bigger phones and smaller tablets? I don't get it.

+1

feflower
Mar 5, 2012, 09:54 AM
What is peoples obsession with having bigger phones and smaller tablets? I don't get it.

I will repeat what I've always said:


Why I want a smaller iPad

-I want to thumb type.
-I want something I can quickly slip in and out of my jacket pocket or purse.
-I want something less conspicuous than an iPad in public places, subway,etc.
-My simple needs do not justify the price of an iPad
-I easily drop things.


What I want a larger iPhone/iPod Touch:

-My aging eyes can no longer comfortably read and navigate research articles on my iPod Touch



Now my needs does not justify the production of a smaller iPad. But I think there is a large population of people out there who share my thoughts. Therefore, I think there is a viable market for this.

ArcaneDevice
Mar 5, 2012, 09:57 AM
for those of you questioning why Apple ought to do this is:

1- One size does not fit all

Except when buying a monitor.

iSee
Mar 5, 2012, 09:57 AM
I object to this rumor because it's the same rumor from the same source, over and over!

I do think its a good idea for Apple to expand its iPad line. There's always an advantage to a bigger screen and a disadvantage to a larger and heavier device. I think the important considerations are transportability and usability. So I see some natural levels:
* fits comfortably in your pocket and hand (iPhone, Touch)
* comfortable to hold with one hand, fits in a purse or small bag -- 7.8" iPad mini?
* comfortable to hold with two hands, requires bag to transport (9.8" iPad)

I would need to see a 7.8" iPad in person, but maybe it slots into that middle spot.

dethmaShine
Mar 5, 2012, 09:58 AM
I've just one simple question to ask.

Are we thinking that for the rest of our lives, we are going to have iPad in a single size?

Are we thinking that Apple will never ever release an iPad in a different size/aspect ratio?

Are we thinking that the technology will never innovate so as to make way for smaller/larger iPads?

If that is the case, we are kidding ourselves. Steve Jobs in 2009-10 said that a smaller iPad isn't possible due to software constraints. I believe that the technology will go past the barrier and the software paradigms for mobile computing will mature and we will see a smaller iPad in the near future.

And honestly? I would be interested in one. So will millions of people.

Just my 2 cents.

dokujaryu
Mar 5, 2012, 10:03 AM
I would like to pay about $400 for an 8" iPad assuming the following:

iPad 2 Processor
iPad 2 Screen Resolution
iPad 2 amount of RAM
3MP camera resolution?
Bluetooth 4.0
NFC (contingent on Apple quality software offering)
iPad 2 amount of storage (same bump as current iPads)
Available HSPA+ (same bump as current iPads)

I would probably get the 32GB with 3G for $629. Something that portable, I probably want mobile data.

paul4339
Mar 5, 2012, 10:04 AM
I will repeat what I've always said:


Why I want a smaller iPad


What I want a larger iPhone/iPod Touch:

-My aging eyes can no longer comfortably read and navigate research articles on my iPod Touch

.

I agree, smartphone form factor gets the job done but is too small to use comfortably for longer periods of time.

If Apple ever does release different size tablets (whether it's a small iPad or bigger iPod), I think they would probably want to overwhelming establish a product identity for the iPad first (only one size) like they did with the iPod - Then introduce variants later...

Their priority generally is to make good products first (doing it right) , rather than coming out with a short term response to competitors such as the Fire.


.

nuckinfutz
Mar 5, 2012, 10:06 AM
I object to this rumor because it's the same rumor from the same source, over and over!

I do think its a good idea for Apple to expand its iPad line. There's always an advantage to a bigger screen and a disadvantage to a larger and heavier device. I think the important considerations are transportability and usability. So I see some natural levels:
* fits comfortably in your pocket and hand (iPhone, Touch)
* comfortable to hold with one hand, fits in a purse or small bag -- 7.8" iPad mini?
* comfortable to hold with two hands, requires bag to transport (9.8" iPad)

I would need to see a 7.8" iPad in person, but maybe it slots into that middle spot.

That's just it..it's not just Digitimes reporting that Apple is at the least testing a smaller iPad. Taiwanese newspaper United Evening and the WSJ have all not mentioned. it.

I think it's clear that a smaller iPad is being looked at. We'll see if it goes into full production. The Q3 timeframe is nice. The iPad with launch usually in March means that by the biggest shopping season of year it's a bit old. A smaller iPad kind of rekindles (pun not intended) the flame and sets Apple up nicely for Black Friday and beyond.

Strategically the iPad mini makes sense from a potential pricing and time of delivery standpoint.

Shivetya
Mar 5, 2012, 10:07 AM
Put the same camera as in the iPhone 4s and I will buy it in a heart beat. Put a VGA camera or none and I will treat it like my Kindle Fire - giving it to the kids.

ILikeTurtles
Mar 5, 2012, 10:07 AM
And he said it would never happen.

Some folks want to believe that Tim Cook is just tossing all things Steve because he can now that STeve is dead. They forget that tech takes at least 3 years from idea to product, often as much as 10 years. Everything we are seeing now was being worked on before Steve went on leave in Jan 2011. Including the no 7 inch or smaller iPad. The reports are that Apple needs it to compete with the Tab, Note and Kindle Fire but the current iPad is killing all of them in sales so the reports are wrong. Apple doesn't need to build to compete.

Exactly! And I don't recall the direct quote, BUT Jobs did say anything smaller than the display on the current iPad would be a fail. They tested every screen size possible before the iPad 1 was released for sale. Jobs hated the smaller displays.

Mattie Num Nums
Mar 5, 2012, 10:10 AM
Apple will sue Samsung. They patented the inch.

ctdonath
Mar 5, 2012, 10:10 AM
yes but apple is missing the huge market that isnt willing the shell out $600 for a tablet.

Reducing the size will not reduce the price an appreciable amount. Users will expect the same performance, just with less screen space. Smaller competing tablets are significantly cheaper because they are cheaper in every sense of the term.

The 16GB 3G iPad is $630.
The 16GB iPhone (to wit 3G iPad nano) is $650.

A 7" iPad will not be $200.

CmdrLaForge
Mar 5, 2012, 10:13 AM
It's great for the people who want a smaller tablet, but I think they have nailed it with the current 9.7" display. It's not too big, but not too small either. The same goes for Samsung and Asus by the way, who also have excellent screen diagonals around the 10"-mark.

Regarding the screen size I fully agree. The one thing I currently don't like so much is the weight. If I read for a longer time it is not so comfortable to hold it in one hand. Then I put it on my lap which is usually ok, but I would really like the iPad to loose some significant weight and a smaller version could help a lot in this regard.

Doombringer
Mar 5, 2012, 10:14 AM
I like the other story going around today... the "iPad 4 in Fall of this year" one.

Yeah, OK.

I don't see Apple turning out products this quickly. There's no need to to move that quickly, and most consumers won't buy "the new thing" if they bought the last new thing 6 months ago. Heck, there are plenty of people using a first-gen iPad, and that only came out in 2010.

Maybe we'll see an iPad Mini. We'll definitely see a new iteration of the iPhone -- it's time for LTE, they can't keep putting it off. But an iPad 4 after the 2.5/3 launches in March? Come on.

paul4339
Mar 5, 2012, 10:18 AM
....So I see some natural levels:
* fits comfortably in your pocket and hand (iPhone, Touch)
* comfortable to hold with one hand, fits in a purse or small bag -- 7.8" iPad mini?
* comfortable to hold with two hands, requires bag to transport (9.8" iPad)

I would need to see a 7.8" iPad in person, but maybe it slots into that middle spot.

Hypothetically, if given the choice, do you think you would prefer:

- a 7.8" iPad form factor
Or
- a 7.8 iPod form factor (no side bezel)... a more bit like a kindle in shape.

Would you prefer:

- less expensive but less memory and more dependent on iCloud
Or
- more expensive but more local memory

.

Macdude2010
Mar 5, 2012, 10:19 AM
I think Digitimes needs to stop with these stupid rumors, apple is not making a smaller iPad, only Digitimes thinks so

Rogifan
Mar 5, 2012, 10:20 AM
No.

The iPad is a mobile device designed to fill the gap between smartphone and notebook. Leaving it at home where your computer is completely defeats the purpose. This is another unreliable rumor like the rest of them. They spent months figuring out the perfect size for the iPad, I highly doubt they are second guessing it because of flimsy sales of a few android tablets.
Exactly. And where is the evidence that these smaller tablets are eating into iPad sales or preventing apple from acquiring new customers? Isn't it possible that there are Kindle Fire customers who had/have no intention of getting a iPad? Also I doubt many android tablet users were first interested in an iPad but bout something else b/c of iPads size.

notjustjay
Mar 5, 2012, 10:21 AM
While I'm as skeptical as the rest of you, I do kinda like the 7-8" screen size.

I owned an iPad 1 and I loved it (I sold it only because once I got an iPhone 4 I didn't feel the need to keep both). My only problem with it was that it was a bit awkward to carry around. I don't generally carry a briefcase, backpack or messenger bag ("man purse") so I always ended up carrying the iPad by itself, tucked under an arm. It didn't fit in any coat pockets. I had to hide it under the driver's seat in my car whenever I had it with me and popped into a store or restaurant.

I feel like a slightly smaller iPad would fit in a jacket pocket and that makes a world of difference.

Certainly it was the "I can take it everywhere without having to hide it all the time" factor that influenced me to keep using the iPhone 4 and sell the iPad.

Rogifan
Mar 5, 2012, 10:22 AM
I think Digitimes needs to stop with these stupid rumors, apple is not making a smaller iPad, only Digitimes thinks soand all these financial analysts who predicted Kindle Fire would be an iPad killer...

franswa za
Mar 5, 2012, 10:25 AM
And somewhere Steve Jobs is spinning in his grave.

LOL

start sanding your fingerips if you have not done it for the small iphone screen already

Skika
Mar 5, 2012, 10:26 AM
iNote. It will sell Millions. DO NOT underestimate the power of "purse compliant". :apple:

I doubt they would choose a different name than the iPad. Its allready a really powerfull well known name. Some even call all tablets "iPads".

striker33
Mar 5, 2012, 10:28 AM
Unless they are incredibly cheap, this is extremely pointless given the current amount of extremely cheap and powerful 7" tablets already on the market (PlayBook, HTC Flyer, Kindle Fire, etc). The aspect ratio of the iPad is also unsuitable for putting it in jacket pockets or large trouser pockets due to its width.

You also have the Galaxy Tab 7.7, and the screen is the best by a mile currently on tablet devices.

Apple should really stick with keeping their full sized iPad ahead of the currently superior Transformer Prime. The super high res screen will easily put them back on top. Yes, the Android devices may be getting similar screens, but Android Apps are very poorly optimised, where as iOS developers are usually very quick with adapting to new devices.

nuckinfutz
Mar 5, 2012, 10:30 AM
Unless they are incredibly cheap, this is extremely pointless given the current amount of extremely cheap and powerful 7" tablets already on the market (PlayBook, HTC Flyer, Kindle Fire, etc). The aspect ratio of the iPad is also unsuitable for putting it in jacket pockets or large trouser pockets due to its width.

You also have the Galaxy Tab 7.7, and the screen is the best by a mile currently on tablet devices.

Apple should really stick with keeping their full sized iPad ahead of the currently superior Transformer Prime. The super high res screen will easily put them back on top. Yes, the Android devices may be getting similar screens, but Android Apps are very poorly optimised, where as iOS developers are usually very quick with adapting to new devices.

It doesn't matter what's come before. The Android 7 tablets haven't sold all that well but then again neither has the 10 models.

The iPad isn't about the size it's about the software. iOS can be packaged in a 3.5" screen and people love it. It can be packaged in a 9.7" screen and people love it. Thus ...there is no problem adding it to a 7.85 screen. People will love it.

217833
Mar 5, 2012, 10:31 AM
Makes sense to me, the same way I wouldn't be surprise (I even hope) the iPhone 5 would stay under 4" (or right at 4" without any dimensions increase, no bezel).

It would also make sense to complete the product range between the 4" iPhone and the 9.7" iPad. The 7.85" might be the right spot for more mobility to easily fit in the purse.

Also, having a phone over 4" is just ridiculous. I have a friend who has the Galaxy Note and it's definitely not a smartphone... way too big to fit in the pocket. And it's not even a real tablet, way too small.

So instead to follow this direction, Apple might be smarter by keeping the smartphone small enough to fit the pocket and having an iPad and iPad mini for people at home and/or mobile.

Even Price wise, at $299 for the first model (maybe 8GB only) it might be interesting... While the iPad 9.7" could stay at $499 (16GB). It would definitely drive people to spend few more bucks to have an iPad instead an Android Tablets or Kindle Fire.

Personally I would love a 7.85" on the go and the 9.7" at home :)

Spid

Yvan256
Mar 5, 2012, 10:37 AM
What is peoples obsession with having bigger phones and smaller tablets? I don't get it.

Best comment I've read in months.

nuckinfutz
Mar 5, 2012, 10:38 AM
Best comment I've read in months.

I pity our future if that's the best comment you've read in months.

BowTheMan89
Mar 5, 2012, 10:39 AM
Reducing the size will not reduce the price an appreciable amount. Users will expect the same performance, just with less screen space. Smaller competing tablets are significantly cheaper because they are cheaper in every sense of the term.

The 16GB 3G iPad is $630.
The 16GB iPhone (to wit 3G iPad nano) is $650.

A 7" iPad will not be $200.

If they find no way of reducing cost significantly then i agree, a 7in iPad would be unrealistic and detrimental to the current iPads sales. There are however a number of options on the table, perhaps a low storage iCloud dependent iPad or wifi only, something along those lines (i don't have any better ideas, im not in product development).

Apple will not release a smaller iPad if the consumers decision comes down to preference alone. No company would, devices need more than that to distinguish themselves, otherwise its a guessing game on which product sells, and companies don't like leaving their business to chance.

Imhotep397
Mar 5, 2012, 10:41 AM
I wonder if Apple would be able to or should pursue legally barring Samsung from operating both Fabrication/Assembly and consumer product sales services in the US relative to small personal electronics devices? It's clear there are anti-trust and possibly environment manipulation issues with Apple using Samsung's Fab/assembly services starting three years ago and then finding that Samsung had not only ripped off Apple products that were on Samsung's assembly lines, but sold that privileged information to other tech companies. To be honest the connection is so obvious I don't even see why they would need a smoking gun witness for that...it's pretty common sense looking at the pre-iPhone mobile phone industry and comparing that to the current one.

WLS
Mar 5, 2012, 10:47 AM
....and there are millions who see it the same way. :apple:
Have to agree. I'm buying the iPad3 as I have since the first but I have to admit that's because it has been the only choice. The iPad3 may be my final one for a while and will get used at home or when I am away at a hotel but for going out and about around town a smaller size would work better and that is what I would buy in the future given a choice. It'll be that or a larger 5inch iPod Touch which is equally doubtful. I have to say the rumors of the 7inch size are getting pretty hard to ignore. Unless these sites are just echoing each other there seems to be a growing body of opinion that one will happen.

JHankwitz
Mar 5, 2012, 10:49 AM
I sure hope that Apple isn't reverting back to the stupid mistakes they made after Steve was booted out in the 80's. They tried to fill every nitch market and diluted their focus to the point that they almost went out of business.

Let the others waste their resources trying to fill small markets while making minimal profits. Apple needs to keep focus on making the very best products for those willing to pay for the value the products provide.

Bubba Satori
Mar 5, 2012, 10:55 AM
What is peoples obsession with having bigger phones and smaller tablets? I don't get it.

Uh...different people have different needs? :eek:

nuckinfutz
Mar 5, 2012, 10:56 AM
I sure hope that Apple isn't reverting back to the stupid mistakes they made after Steve was booted out in the 80's. They tried to fill every nitch market and diluted their focus to the point that they almost went out of business.

Let the others waste their resources trying to fill small markets while making minimal profits. Apple needs to keep focus on making the very best products for those willing to pay for the value the products provide.

Apple's biggest successes came from finding products they could sell to all users including PC

The got wise and leveraged the iPod phenomenon by creating iTunes for Windows and that's when things took off.

They can't lose here. We're talking about a Global market now. Whatever they make there's going to be a market for it if they hit certain price bands. Not everyone can afford $500 dollars for a tablet.

Dorje Sylas
Mar 5, 2012, 10:57 AM
I got an idea what all these small touch panels are for. They are not for an iPad but for the MacMini. Apple will be redesigning the MacMini with a touch panel top so it can operate as a small business server for things like coffee shops and other venues that aren't at the top of the tech game.

Perhaps also for the Time Capsual or Airport Extream.

[sarcasm] Maybe I can write for Digitimes, I just need to find some dubious foreign language translated sources to back up by assertion.

Yvan256
Mar 5, 2012, 10:58 AM
I pity our future if that's the best comment you've read in months.

Okay, best comment I've read in months about iPad rumors. Feel more confident about our future now?

Seriously, people keep talking about screen sizes, technologies, price points, markets, etc, etc. I know we're here to talk and this is a rumors site, but some comments are so "out there" that it's become pointless to read some of them.

JGowan
Mar 5, 2012, 10:59 AM
While the iPad is doing well in education, an even bigger thing right now is the iPod, especially at the primary level, where educators are using them as rewards when kids do well. There's always time during the day that's free and the iPods are doled out to the deserving. I can see an 7.85" iPad being a big deal at that level too. Why?

#1) Bigger than the iPod but not too big (as the iPad might be for 7-10 year olds)... video would look great on this 7.85 device. Let's be honest, now that the iPad is out, who wants to watch video on their iPhone or iPod? The iPad is great but I think for portability, a smaller iPad would be the best, especially for small hands. Much easier to hold and not fumble.

#2) Cheaper than even the level entry iPad might be for education.

#3) Biggest reason to me is that the schools already have tons of education and game Apps to use immediately. Amazon Fire is not viable for the schools who are already invested in iPods/iPads because nothing they have works already. This smaller tablet comes in working with all that they have.

My wife is a first grade teacher and I'm getting this info from seeing how the iPods and iPads are used at school. A lot of these kids are truly taking to the Apple devices because they are from poor families and the chance to use the electronics is only during school.


It makes more sense and seems more likely to me to double the iPhone 4's resolution in both directions, thus:

More Likely Small iPad: 1920x1280 @ 7.85 = 293.96 ppiWhile I would like a smaller iPad that was higher resolution, it seems to me that if Apple is indeed putting out a smaller version, they will keep the resolution at the current so that (1) all current apps continue to function without any manipulation by developers and (2) to keep the cost down. If Apple does put this out, it's to answer smaller tablets in the market, primarily the Kindle Fire which is a mere $199. Were Apple put a 1920x1280 screen in it, it would certainly raise costs. That's not to say that they'd never put in a better and better screen as time goes by. We see this annually as Apple continues to improve their products. However, to start, they would certainly stick with 1024 x 768.

EstrlM3
Mar 5, 2012, 11:01 AM
If this device existed as stated, it would have a smaller ppi than the original iPhone. It appears to me that Apple is done with low pixel density displays.

Rumored Small iPad: 1024*768 @ 7.85 = 163.06 ppi

iPad 1 & 2: 1024*768 @ 9.7 = 131.96 ppi
iPad 3: 2048*1536 @ 9.7 = 263.92 ppi

iPhone: 480x320 @ 3.5 = 164.83 ppi
iPhone 4: 960*640 @ 3.5 = 329.65 ppi


It makes more sense and seems more likely to me to double the iPhone 4's resolution in both directions, thus:

More Likely Small iPad: 1920x1280 @ 7.85 = 293.96 ppi

This would be slightly higher than the iPad 3, but slightly less than the iPhone 4. Right where it should be based on it's size, and viewing distance from your eyes. Plus developers still get the whole benefit of being able to easily remake apps by doubling the pixels on their iPhone 4 app screens.

It's just logical. Can I get some props for that at least?

The aspect ratio of the iPad is 1.33 vs the iPhone aspect ratio being 1.5

striker33
Mar 5, 2012, 11:09 AM
The aspect ratio of the iPad is 1.33 vs the iPhone aspect ratio being 1.5

Tbh there is no chance of Apple introducing yet another different screen resolution to its lineup. Plus the 7 inch model would be aimed at the lower end of the market, so it'd use the current screen res of the iPad 2.

olegandbuster25
Mar 5, 2012, 11:10 AM
what is peoples obsession with having bigger phones and smaller tablets? I don't get it.

well said!

JacaByte
Mar 5, 2012, 11:10 AM
Quit posting these stories.

It's not going to happen. You know why? Because Steve Jobs said it wouldn't. If it does happen, that's how you know the management at Apple has broken down, and if you have stock in Apple that's when you should take it out.

Digitimes is just pulling straws out of the air here, we have not seen any leaked parts for this 7.85" iPad whatsoever, which should be a bit suspicious seeing that the iPad 3 is due for announcement in 2 days. It's. Not. Gonna. Happen.

nuckinfutz
Mar 5, 2012, 11:12 AM
Quit posting these stories.

It's not going to happen. You know why? Because Steve Jobs said it wouldn't. If it does happen, that's how you know the management at Apple has broken down, and if you have stock in Apple that's when you should take it out.

Digitimes is just pulling straws out of the air here, we have not seen any leaked parts for this 7.85" iPad whatsoever, which should be a bit suspicious seeing that the iPad 3 is due for announcement in 2 days. It's. Not. Gonna. Happen.

Brain dead argument. Digitimes reported it. Now they're linking to another Taiwain company that's also talking about a smaller iPad and Samsung had a document leak (they never planned it to be public) talking about the inevitability of a smaller iPad.

How many sources do you need?

World Citizen
Mar 5, 2012, 11:21 AM
I thing there is a market for a smaller one...

Dont's sell it as iPad mini, but as iPod XL....

They won't do it.. it think, but i bed my ass they would sell millions of them.

Drop the iPod touch to. 179dollar
The Nano to 119

And introduce a iPodXL for about 259...

No 3g only wifi..
Medium graphics.. so there is the "better" iPad,
6 inch,
Less battery life than iPad,
Only front camera,

nuckinfutz
Mar 5, 2012, 11:24 AM
Why would you do that? The iPod brand is synonymous with music. The iPod Touch plays games and other things but when you say iPod it means music to people.

iPads signify a tablet...more of a generalized product. Web access, music, video and games can all be done.

There's little point in building iPad brand name awareness and then throwing it away.

drober30
Mar 5, 2012, 11:26 AM
It's great for the people who want a smaller tablet, but I think they have nailed it with the current 9.7" display. It's not too big, but not too small either. The same goes for Samsung and Asus by the way, who also have excellent screen diagonals around the 10"-mark.

But the current iPad 2 is to heavy.

JacaByte
Mar 5, 2012, 11:29 AM
Digitimes reported it.
Yeah, that's the problem.

They've been plugging for a mini iPad since the iPad 1 came out, and have been saying a mini iPad would be announced last year, and then this year. The announcement date for this fictitious iPad from Digitimes has gradually been moved forward over the course of about a year now, and it has never materialized.

So if you're not going to take what Digitimes says with a giant bag of salt, that's your problem.

gnasher729
Mar 5, 2012, 11:32 AM
Since it takes a year or more and several mockups to produce a new device, I'm sure Steve Jobs had input into this, if not actually authorizing it.

You are making the assumption that there is any truth to this. Did you see "Digitimes" in the article? Digitimes is an abbreviation for "we have no clue, so we just make things up, and if we make enough things up then something must be true, just by chance".


Brain dead argument. Digitimes reported it. Now they're linking to another Taiwain company that's also talking about a smaller iPad and Samsung had a document leak (they never planned it to be public) talking about the inevitability of a smaller iPad.

How many sources do you need?

These things go round in circles. So Digitimes reports a rumor. Samsung either believes it and a document leaks by accident, or Samsung pretends to believe it and leaks a document on purpose, so we now have two sources with one copying the other. Then another Taiwan company repeats what Digitimes is saying, so we have three sources. Add "nickinfutz" making it four sources. Surely with four sources it must be true?


It's not going to happen. You know why? Because Steve Jobs said it wouldn't. If it does happen, that's how you know the management at Apple has broken down, and if you have stock in Apple that's when you should take it out.

Now _that_ is not an argument. Steve Jobs always said this and that wouldn't happen, right up to the moment where it happened and then it would be the greatest thing on earth.

Exactly! And I don't recall the direct quote, BUT Jobs did say anything smaller than the display on the current iPad would be a fail. They tested every screen size possible before the iPad 1 was released for sale. Jobs hated the smaller displays.

See above. When Jobs said he hated something that meant nothing more than "Apple is not selling it right now". And that meant nothing more than "it is not in Apple's best interest right now to sell this". It _might_ be that the idea was stupid, it might be that the time was not there yet to implement the idea in the necessary quality, it might be that it would distract from other products, or that there is just a limit to how many new products Apple can show every year. What it never meant was that Jobs would never change his mind.

I wonder if Apple would be able to or should pursue legally barring Samsung from operating both Fabrication/Assembly and consumer product sales services in the US relative to small personal electronics devices? It's clear there are anti-trust and possibly environment manipulation issues with Apple using Samsung's Fab/assembly services starting three years ago and then finding that Samsung had not only ripped off Apple products that were on Samsung's assembly lines, but sold that privileged information to other tech companies. To be honest the connection is so obvious I don't even see why they would need a smoking gun witness for that...it's pretty common sense looking at the pre-iPhone mobile phone industry and comparing that to the current one.

I really wonder what you're smoking. Exactly what Apple products were on which Samsung assembly line, and what information did Samsung get that way that they couldn't get by going to an Apple store, buying an iPod, an iPhone and an iPad, and taking them apart carefully? You don't need spies in the production line to copy the iPad design if that's what you want to do, you just order one directly from Apple.

wonderbread57
Mar 5, 2012, 11:32 AM
Backlight? With this size display apple needs to go OLED FFS!

nuckinfutz
Mar 5, 2012, 11:34 AM
Don't care about Digitimes really but when I start to see others talking about 7.85 iPads I start to listen a bit more.

Then I ask myself does a smaller iPad make sense and it does to me provided it offers a couple of things.

1. Cheaper price. $299 entry.
2. Good battery and display
3. Decent gaming performance
4. Less weight

Not everyone wants to carry around over a pound especially if you plan to do some reading.

The Economist
Mar 5, 2012, 11:35 AM
I'm sure Digitimes is wrong, but...


Its possible Apple thinks the iPad mini could do for iPad, what the iPod mini did for iPod. The iPod mini hit the right price point, and with limited storage and screen size, blew the iPod market into the stratosphere.

A $199 iPad mini, could do that too. It wouldn't be for the traditional iPad buyer, but neither was the iPod mini for the iPod buyer.

But there's already a $199 iPad mini, and it is called the iPod Touch.

skellener
Mar 5, 2012, 11:37 AM
Not gonna happen.

Judas1
Mar 5, 2012, 11:37 AM
People want convenience. Thats all there is to it. If the 7.8 tablet is more convenient to take out, carry around, and hold for a prolonged amount of time, you bet there are people who will want one. BTW, most people just use a tablet for media consumption, so the 10 inch ipad is less convenient, yet not more useful for them.

ProductGuy
Mar 5, 2012, 11:41 AM
And somewhere Steve Jobs is spinning in his grave.

FACT: Whenever Steve Jobs would take time to ridicule an idea in front of the press -- an iPod that could play videos, for example -- it usually meant he was already working on it. :cool: I have no doubt that, for at least a year, they've had the smaller version spec'd, prototyped, vetted and ready to roll, awaiting for the day markets showed any signs of wanting it. That has clearly arrived and OF COURSE Apple is concerned about Kindle Fire popularity, no matter what Tim Cook tells the media. It's going to happen this year and SJ probably even blessed the announcement day, sometime in September. I very much doubt it will be called an iPad, and would bet on it having something close to a retina display, which will make it far more desirable than Kindle Fire 2.

daveathall
Mar 5, 2012, 11:41 AM
Greater choice of product = good thing.

ProductGuy
Mar 5, 2012, 11:46 AM
But there's already a $199 iPad mini, and it is called the iPod Touch.

...and that could be what they call this new critter -- iPod touch HD, priced at $249 - $299.

----------

Now _that_ is not an argument. Steve Jobs always said this and that wouldn't happen, right up to the moment where it happened and then it would be the greatest thing on earth.

Exactly -- in fact, whenever he said something will never happen, you could practically take it to the bank that he was working on it and didn't want anyone to beat him to market. :apple:

nuckinfutz
Mar 5, 2012, 11:48 AM
These things go round in circles. So Digitimes reports a rumor. Samsung either believes it and a document leaks by accident, or Samsung pretends to believe it and leaks a document on purpose, so we now have two sources with one copying the other. Then another Taiwan company repeats what Digitimes is saying, so we have three sources. Add "nickinfutz" making it four sources. Surely with four sources it must be true?

.

Rinse ..lather repeat. I've heard the naysayers at every level.

Apple's not going to do a phone. They can't beat Nokia
Apple's not going to do Tablets...everyone has failed there

What really matters is "Does it makes sense?"

The case for a smaller iPad is pretty clear if you look at it objectively. Kindles don't come in just one size so why should a more general purpose device like an iPad come in one size?

ProductGuy
Mar 5, 2012, 11:52 AM
I thing there is a market for a smaller one...

Dont's sell it as iPad mini, but as iPod XL....

They won't do it.. it think, but i bed my ass they would sell millions of them.

Drop the iPod touch to. 179dollar
The Nano to 119

And introduce a iPodXL for about 259...

No 3g only wifi..
Medium graphics.. so there is the "better" iPad,
6 inch,
Less battery life than iPad,
Only front camera,

All good guesses, except for battery life (Apple's obsessive about this) and graphics, which will be whatever it needs to be to make app-scaling easy.

lilo777
Mar 5, 2012, 11:58 AM
But there's already a $199 iPad mini, and it is called the iPod Touch.

It's not iPad Mini, it's iPad Micro. After all it's smaller than modern phones.

ProductGuy
Mar 5, 2012, 11:59 AM
If this device existed as stated, it would have a smaller ppi than the original iPhone. It appears to me that Apple is done with low pixel density displays.

Rumored Small iPad: 1024*768 @ 7.85 = 163.06 ppi

iPad 1 & 2: 1024*768 @ 9.7 = 131.96 ppi
iPad 3: 2048*1536 @ 9.7 = 263.92 ppi

iPhone: 480x320 @ 3.5 = 164.83 ppi
iPhone 4: 960*640 @ 3.5 = 329.65 ppi


It makes more sense and seems more likely to me to double the iPhone 4's resolution in both directions, thus:

More Likely Small iPad: 1920x1280 @ 7.85 = 293.96 ppi

This would be slightly higher than the iPad 3, but slightly less than the iPhone 4. Right where it should be based on it's size, and viewing distance from your eyes. Plus developers still get the whole benefit of being able to easily remake apps by doubling the pixels on their iPhone 4 app screens.

It's just logical. Can I get some props for that at least?

Makes lots of sense. I'd bet on it.

ThinkDifferentX
Mar 5, 2012, 12:06 PM
I don't think when Steve said that 9.7 " was the right size that he was all along planning on making a smaller one. If it's such a no brainer and so easy to do, we would have seen it before now. It wouldn't take them from before the iPad launch to now to do it. There is no technical reason why they can't do it and it would take them this long if they were doing it.

I'm not sure when Jobs said no one wants movies on their iPod, but I'd bet it was before the Touch. I'm sure their movie sales didn't take of until the iPhone and touch came out, because not many people do want to pay for movies to watch on a 2" screen. A bigger screen made it work.

I don't think there is an education market for a smaller iPad. Cheaper maybe considering how little the US invests in education. Who wants to read their textbooks on something the size of a small notepad? The iPad size is close to an 8.5 x 11 piece of paper. That size is what people read lots of things on, and I think that is why it was chosen. If my school had textbooks on 7 inch tablets, I would be miserable trying to read educational material. Maybe for a novel where layout doesn't help illuminate key points and organize info, the small size would be ok. But for textbooks I think something as close to existing books' pages is the right answer.

I don't think people complaining about how heavy the iPad currently is read many textbooks. Most weigh around 2 lbs. I'm a pretty skinny guy yet I can muster the power to hold an iPad to read.

There are already many companies filling the cheap phablet category, why not buy one of those?

nuckinfutz
Mar 5, 2012, 12:08 PM
Apple is not going to present developers with more than 3 iOS resolutions to support.

Today:

480x320 for the iPhone 3GS
960x640 for the iPhone 4, 4s
1024x768 for the iPad.

Q4 2012:

3GS is gone

960x640 for the iPhone 4,4s
1024x768 for the iPad and iPad2 and iPad mini
2048- 1536 for iPad 3

No additional resolutions will apply

kdarling
Mar 5, 2012, 12:14 PM
Only in an Apple forum is there always so much worry over anything that provides more choice.

No wonder Jobs said he didn't ask customers what they thought products should be like.

nuckinfutz
Mar 5, 2012, 12:15 PM
Only in an Apple forum is there always so much worry over anything that provides more choice.

No wonder Jobs said he didn't listen to what customers thought should come out.

So true.

"No no Apple! Don't give me any choice! Please nooooooo!"

ThinkDifferentX
Mar 5, 2012, 12:21 PM
Only in an Apple forum is there always so much worry over anything that provides more choice.

No wonder Jobs said he didn't listen to what customers thought products should be like.

Jobs didn't listen to what customers said should come out because Apple is not a restaurant. Variety is best served with multiple companies focusing, not one company trying to market any idea that comes along, even if it is a good one.

Products don't make it to market because a few people say "I want this."
And from the looks of the success of Apple with Steve, vs without, I think he didn't need to listen to what people say should be made.

I just had to add, Apple in no way restricts my choice. If they don't make something I want, I buy it from someone who does. I choose Apple products because find them to be the best experience.
Linux is an example where variety can be paralyzing, not empowering.

nagromme
Mar 5, 2012, 01:32 PM
This makes little sense, except it one (possible I suppose) important scenario. If the regular iPad’s screen manufacturing is a bottleneck, more than other components, then that limits the number of people Apple can reach. If a totally different screen can be made in vast quantities by different factories/lines without too much harm to the full-size screen quantities, then fragmenting the iPad line in this way could hugely increase sales by removing the bottleneck. That could, possibly, be worth the downsides.

the8thark
Mar 5, 2012, 01:42 PM
I doubt it.
Quoted for truth.

Apple would be mad to release another size of iPad or other tablet like this. I doubt they will. Sure they probably have a prototype at Apple HQ. But for sale? A very bad idea indeed.

And a 2nd iPad release date in the same year?
Another not going to happen.

Everyone (MacRumors included on numerous occasions) said there would be a 2nd iPad release in 2011. Though the then CEO (steve Jobs) said "2011 year of the iPad 2". And to no surprise everyone who believed this was wrong and the Apple CEO was right.

Of cause the Apple CEO was correct. Why anyone would believe some half-baked rumour over the direct words of the Apple CEO is beyond me. I do not understand how some people can be that foolish.

So will there be a 2nd iPad release in 2012? No. The best guess is that iPad 3 will come in a few days and no new iPad after that to 2013 at the earliest. But if this tablet is an iTouch-large then that'd be silly. Cause the same size for iTouch and iPhone is very good for developers.

So my verdict on this rumour?
Total BS. Apple will stick with for the foreseeable future their winning product line up. Just improved roughly every year.

nuckinfutz
Mar 5, 2012, 01:45 PM
This makes little sense, except it one (possible I suppose) important scenario. If the regular iPad’s screen manufacturing is a bottleneck, more than other components, then that limits the number of people Apple can reach. If a totally different screen can be made in vast quantities by different factories/lines without too much harm to the full-size screen quantities, then fragmenting the iPad line in this way could hugely increase sales by removing the bottleneck. That could, possibly, be worth the downsides.

Yup ...chances are the Retina display for the iPad is going to be tough to manufacture in huge numbers. The potential fault here is Q4..if there's an iPad mini as an option it gives Apple leverage and keeps people in the iOS ecosystem which is where the money is.

Let's not forget this is Apple against EVERY Android competitor. They don't have the luxury of sitting back and letting markets get established by others.

----------

Quoted for truth.

Apple would be mad to release another size of iPad or other tablet like this. I doubt they will. Sure they probably have a prototype at Apple HQ. But for sale? A very bad idea indeed.

You guys really need to keep your posts a little shorter LOL. Way too much content here for me to mull over.

D.T.
Mar 5, 2012, 01:47 PM
More Likely Small iPad: 1920x1280 @ 7.85 = 293.96 ppi

Makes lots of sense. I'd bet on it.

Except iPads so far have been ~1.33 aspect ratio, and that’s a resolution scaled up from an iPhone which is 1.5 ratio. Not to say they might not go that way, but I think Apple’s tablet design is for a wider product (for better use in portrait mode).

ericrwalker
Mar 5, 2012, 01:50 PM
Apple would be mad to release another size of iPad or other tablet like this. I doubt they will. Sure they probably have a prototype at Apple HQ. But for sale? A very bad idea indeed.

I'd buy it, and my wife also said she wishes the iPad was just a little smaller. They'd be mad not to release one for sale.

the8thark
Mar 5, 2012, 02:04 PM
I'd buy it, and my wife also said she wishes the iPad was just a little smaller. They'd be mad not to release one for sale.

We can agree to disagree. And Apple billions of profits say the current lineup without a mid sized machine is working well for them.

There is a lot of mid sized tablets out there. You can purchase those. Lots of choice. All not Apple products though.

----------


You guys really need to keep your posts a little shorter LOL. Way too much content here for me to mull over.

Sorry mate.
But that's how some of us roll. We post few posts but each one has a lot of content.

ericrwalker
Mar 5, 2012, 02:06 PM
Of course they are doing well, the iPad is a great product. Doesn't mean that a one size fits is the best option.

We can agree to disagree. And Apple billions of profits say the current lineup without a mid sized machine is working well for them.

There is a lot of mid sized tablets out there. You can purchase those. Lots of choice. All not Apple products though.

----------



Sorry mate.
But that's how some of us roll. We post few posts but each one has a lot of content.

nuckinfutz
Mar 5, 2012, 02:08 PM
I'd buy it, and my wife also said she wishes the iPad was just a little smaller. They'd be mad not to release one for sale.

Don't worry it'll happen. The naysayers points center around

1. A departed Steve Jobs comments
2. Fragmentation mythology
3. Inability to see any needs beyond their own.

Reality is more likely

Apple owns the highest volume media store in the land
They just built a huge data center and are looking to build another
iCloud makes it easy to add devices and manage them

All logical signs point to these rumors being true.

xoggyux
Mar 5, 2012, 02:13 PM
Don't care about Digitimes really but when I start to see others talking about 7.85 iPads I start to listen a bit more.

Then I ask myself does a smaller iPad make sense and it does to me provided it offers a couple of things.

1. Cheaper price. $299 entry.
2. Good battery and display
3. Decent gaming performance
4. Less weight

Not everyone wants to carry around over a pound especially if you plan to do some reading.
add to that list:

5. Real magic
6. Button for instant leprecon and/or santa

Not everyone wants to carry around over a pound especially if you plan to do some reading.
I don't know if you have noticed but pretty much most of the books in existence already weight more than the ipad and neither of those books have access to the interwebs. My anatomy textbook weights about the same as 8-9 ipads =)

nuckinfutz
Mar 5, 2012, 02:15 PM
add to that list:

5. Real magic
6. Button for instant leprecon and/or santa

7. Unicorn Farts

ericrwalker
Mar 5, 2012, 02:17 PM
I don't know if you have noticed but pretty much most of the books in existence already weight more than the ipad and neither of those books have access to the interwebs. My anatomy textbook weights about the same as 8-9 ipads =)


You are talking school text books. I think others might be referring to books people read for enjoyment. (paperbacks).

ABernardoJr
Mar 5, 2012, 02:20 PM
Don't care about Digitimes really but when I start to see others talking about 7.85 iPads I start to listen a bit more.

Then I ask myself does a smaller iPad make sense and it does to me provided it offers a couple of things.

1. Cheaper price. $299 entry.
2. Good battery and display
3. Decent gaming performance
4. Less weight

Not everyone wants to carry around over a pound especially if you plan to do some reading.

I know, how can anyone ever get along with carrying over a pound? Such a travesty. That's like, 15 oz too heavy. :rolleyes:

lilo777
Mar 5, 2012, 02:25 PM
I know, how can anyone ever get along with carrying over a pound? Such a travesty. That's like, 15 oz too heavy. :rolleyes:

It's not the weight by itself it's the weight rated against what it allows you to do. Since iPads are used mostly for web browsing, social media and some gaming, all this could be done just as well with a lighter device. It's hard to justify hauling such a heavy tablet when the extra size and weight does not offer any meaningful advantages (compared, say, to Galaxy Tab 7.7)

tonytiger13
Mar 5, 2012, 02:28 PM
People want convenience. Thats all there is to it. If the 7.8 tablet is more convenient to take out, carry around, and hold for a prolonged amount of time, you bet there are people who will want one. BTW, most people just use a tablet for media consumption, so the 10 inch ipad is less convenient, yet not more useful for them.

How many people is the question and is Apple willing to waste their time if it's not enough people. Filling niche's isn't Apple's thing. They don't change products to appease a small market. If it's the future of computing in their opinion, they'll do it. Apple doesn't do market research in the traditional sense (read Steve's Bio), they are intelligent enough to figure out what the people want because it's something THEY would want (many times before the people knew they wanted it themselves).

xoggyux
Mar 5, 2012, 02:29 PM
You are talking school text books. I think others might be referring to books people read for enjoyment. (paperbacks).

my point is, only tiny books with less than 200 pages or so are really considerable ligher than the ipad or any other eReader. Most importantly, comparing the ipad to a book is not the most accurate comparison, try comparing it with a whole library, how many libraries can you put in your backpack?
Also I dont believe the ipad is an eReader, at least it is not its primary, most important, reason to exist. You want a nice eReader that is better an cheaper than the ipad? get the kindle (the cheap one, the Black and white one) that is the best device out there for a real hardcore reader. Kindle fire, ipad, samsung galaxy, etc those do not compare favorable with the original kindle as a reader device. They are harder on the eye and the battery life is wasted in burning up your retinas.
The ipad should remain focused on what it is, a media consumption device. Everything else are "alternate" functions. Reading is secondary to web-browsing in the ipad. Don't get me wrong, I believe is a good tool for reading, but its definitely not the best and won't be the best either even if it existed in a 5" or 6" or 7" inches version. For more than casual reading the original Black and White kindle blows the ipad away.

ABernardoJr
Mar 5, 2012, 02:32 PM
It's not the weight by itself it's the weight rated against what it allows you to do. Since iPads are used mostly for web browsing, social media and some gaming, all this could be done just as well with a lighter device. It's hard to justify hauling such a heavy tablet when the extra size and weight does not offer any meaningful advantages (compared, say, to Galaxy Tab 7.7)

I can see where people are making their arguments but I figure the issue for me is that the iPad was never "heavy" to begin with. I'm thinking the way things have gotten so light as it is, people are starting to go overboard with how "light" or even "thin" something is. I can imagine some people getting upset over the supposed extra .8 mm of thickness of the iPad 3, and I just don't get how people would really argue that 1.3 pounds is too heavy or maybe how .8 mm of extra thickness would be too much.

Not saying both groups overlap or anything but just making an observation that turned into a rant lol

the8thark
Mar 5, 2012, 02:32 PM
Don't worry it'll happen. The naysayers points center around

1. A departed Steve Jobs comments
2. Fragmentation mythology
3. Inability to see any needs beyond their own.

Reality is more likely

Apple owns the highest volume media store in the land
They just built a huge data center and are looking to build another
iCloud makes it easy to add devices and manage them

All logical signs point to these rumors being true.

I point to:

1. Product fragmentation
2. Product canabilisation (some people would buy an iPad mini instead of an iPad proper)
3. Developer fragmentation. As in having to develop apps for yet another screen size.
4. Additional costs to design and have manufactured another size of iPad. And the profits for this are not guaranteed. All of the competitors inbetween sized tables didn't exactly sell all that well.
5. I'm sure people like Tim Cook, Sir Jonny Ive, Scott Forstall and more still all agree with Jobs old statement that inbetween sized tablets served no real purpose.

So for these reasons I say a inbetween sized iPad is not the right move for Apple at the current time. in the future it might be the way to go. But now it's not right.

And yes fragmentation is real. And not a myth. Just look at the Android universe. Product fragmentation id alive and well there. And it's not a good thing for Android. Just one example.

nuckinfutz
Mar 5, 2012, 02:44 PM
I know, how can anyone ever get along with carrying over a pound? Such a travesty. That's like, 15 oz too heavy. :rolleyes:

Wow was this your Mensa entry? I'm duly impressed by your powers of observation. You so keenly pulled out a portion of my post to inject your snark. And finished it off with that oh so clever roll eyes emotion. Gold star coming your way!

I point to:

1. Product fragmentation
2. Product canabilisation (some people would buy an iPad mini instead of an iPad proper)
3. Developer fragmentation. As in having to develop apps for yet another screen size.
4. Additional costs to design and have manufactured another size of iPad. And the profits for this are not guaranteed. All of the competitors inbetween sized tables didn't exactly sell all that well.

So for these reasons I say a inbetween sized iPad is not the right move for Apple at the current time. in the future it might be the way to go. But now it's not right.

And yes fragmentation is real. And not a myth. Just look at the Android universe. Product fragmentation id alive and well there. And it's not a good thing for Android. Just one example.

1 Overused. Android fragmentation is based on a wide variance in Operating Systems. Display fragmentation is far less of a problem because artwork can be scaled or supplied at different resolutions

2. LOL. Will these actually get harder. Tim Cook quote 2/14/2012 “I think that iPad has cannibalized some Mac sales. And the way that we always view cannibalization is that we’d prefer to do it" (http://www.geekwire.com/2012/apple-boss-takes-couple-cracks-microsoft-amazon-tablets-cannibalize-pcs)

3. LOL the 7.85 screen has the SAME resolution that the current iPad has. Apps need no modification to run.

4. Pie in sky conjecture.


I didn't think you knew what you were talking about and you just proved it.

ericrwalker
Mar 5, 2012, 02:49 PM
So if there is a "perfect" size for the iPad who's to say there isn't a perfect size for a MBP or MBA?

Why doesn't Apple just release one size notebook and one size iMac. Then the sales for the size would be much higher. This logic is the same logic people are using for not allowing another iPad size.

iSee
Mar 5, 2012, 03:09 PM
Hypothetically, if given the choice, do you think you would prefer:

- a 7.8" iPad form factor
Or
- a 7.8 iPod form factor (no side bezel)... a more bit like a kindle in shape.

Would you prefer:

- less expensive but less memory and more dependent on iCloud
Or
- more expensive but more local memory

.

I *think* you could get rid of the bezel on a 7.8" screen because it would be comfortable enough to hold at the bottom... But I'm not sure. If it was unweildly like that then you'd need the bezel... or go down a little in size.

Regarding the memory, I guess Apple has made that a choice customers can make, so I think they'd do the same here.

xoggyux
Mar 5, 2012, 03:23 PM
3. LOL the 7.85 screen has the SAME resolution that the current iPad has. Apps need no modification to run.


True. But Apple already committed to retina display in the ipod, iphone line, rummors say (and to be honest at this point I think its 99.999999% true, we only need 2 more days to wait and see) that the next ipad will also be retina. And last but not least, there are additional rumors about higher resolution macbook pros, etc. So if they dont make it retina display it would be the only product in the iOS line without retina display (perhaps even the only product in apple to not have retina display if the MBP and MBA rumors turn out to be accurate.) That does not sound like apple to me...
Also, for the most part, apple spends the first few months following a product introduction trying to catch up with demand, they probably sell each single unit they produce within a weak during the first few months.. Why would they hinder production of their most popular products to introduce a product which only difference to the old product is that someone pressed the 75% magnify button in the fotocopy?

knucklehead
Mar 5, 2012, 03:24 PM
I point to:
So for these reasons I say a inbetween sized iPad is not the right move for Apple at the current time. in the future it might be the way to go. But now it's not right.


Later this year is in the future -- isn't it?

iSee
Mar 5, 2012, 03:26 PM
It's not the weight by itself it's the weight rated against what it allows you to do. Since iPads are used mostly for web browsing, social media and some gaming, all this could be done just as well with a lighter device. It's hard to justify hauling such a heavy tablet when the extra size and weight does not offer any meaningful advantages (compared, say, to Galaxy Tab 7.7)

The additional screen size offers very siginificant advantages. I think there's plenty of room in the lineup for a 7.85" iPad, but it would not come close to replacing the 9.8" version. All of those things you mention are much better with more screen space than a 7.85" offers. Also, you left personal video viewing off the list, which the iPad is great at.

zephyrnoid
Mar 5, 2012, 03:40 PM
Well, if the form-factor of the 'new device' is a reality, then we may be inching closer to the rest of my wish list. Let's see.
- 7" formfactor. CHECK
- Wireless input for monitoring HD video
- HDMI input for hard wired HD video monitoring
- SDHC Media slot
- totally flat back surface

How am I doing?

Apple...
Mar 5, 2012, 03:54 PM
Doubt it. "Digitimes" says it all...

MattInOz
Mar 5, 2012, 04:39 PM
Quit posting these stories.

It's not going to happen. You know why? Because Steve Jobs said it wouldn't. If it does happen, that's how you know the management at Apple has broken down, and if you have stock in Apple that's when you should take it out.

Digitimes is just pulling straws out of the air here, we have not seen any leaked parts for this 7.85" iPad whatsoever, which should be a bit suspicious seeing that the iPad 3 is due for announcement in 2 days. It's. Not. Gonna. Happen.

Steve, had a habit of saying a very specific thing wouldn't happen in a way that makes people think it was a very general exclusion. So 7.85 is more 8inchish than 7. Not that it'll every be explained in any details. It's all just an illusionist distraction.

While I think it would be good addition to the line up. Don't think it'll happen this year, but if Cocoa Autolayout gets ported to iOS 6 then I'd put money on a smaller and a larger iPad within twelve months.

oliversl
Mar 5, 2012, 05:22 PM
I can believe this, but maybe its Cook choice.

Maybe thats why samsung is promoting Samsung Note like crazy. Like crazy.

Drag'nGT
Mar 5, 2012, 05:22 PM
I'm the goofy guy that would love an ~8" iPad. Why? Well mostly for the apps, games and the easier pocketability. Games that use on screen joysticks would feel better on a smaller tablet.

The 10" is a great screen size when you're watching video but I'm not usually using the iPad for video. My 13" MBP is used for that. The files I share from my server on my home network are 720-1080p mpeg and mkv files that the iPad can't play (even with VLC). I don't want to re-encode the files and transfer them on to the iPad. It's simpler and faster to just throw them on my MBP.



This also fits better with Apple's need to keep a broad market for consumers and the iTunes/AppStore. Apple is beginning to realize that they can be profitable with a product and even more so with the average they make it App purchases over the ownership of the model.

lilo777
Mar 5, 2012, 05:27 PM
Doubt it. "Digitimes" says it all...

Digitime is probably one of the most reliable sources out there. They are not in business of attracting page clicks by publishing Apple rumors (like many other web sites are). They publish news for Taiwan semiconductor/electronics industry (the companies that supply a lot of components to Apple and others). They may get some stuff wrong (as anybody) but they will not publish some unchecked sensational news just because it's about Apple.

the8thark
Mar 5, 2012, 05:38 PM
Later this year is in the future -- isn't it?
Yes. But Apple would have to design and get manufactured the 2nd iPad now for a later in the year release. And now is not the right time for that. I say in a few years at the earliest. But only if things change and a market opens up for a smaller iPad. Because right now there is no market worth Apple investing that money into for a smaller iPad.

tmarks11
Mar 5, 2012, 05:51 PM
Q4 2012:

3GS is gone

960x640 for the iPhone 4,4s
1024x768 for the iPad and iPad2 and iPad mini
2048- 1536 for iPad 3

No additional resolutions will apply
let me fix that for you:

Q4 2012:

960x640 for the iPhone 4,4s
1024x768 for the iPad and iPad2 and iPad mini
1600x1200 for the iPad 2S

There, that's better...

----------

What is peoples obsession with having bigger phones and smaller tablets? I don't get it.

What is it with people's obsession with only having one size tablet?

I just don't get it.

r0gue02
Mar 5, 2012, 05:59 PM
Just a thought but could could this device not be an iPad at all.
With the late Steve Jobs vehement refusal to enter into the bargain section of any market why would Apple change from his plans so quickly.
Consider all of the recent talk of "cracking" the next generation TV, the recent rumours of a new/revised :apple:TV STB and throw in Apple shopping around for 8" screens. Could it be possible that this form factor would suit an interactive remote.
It would be a great product although not neccesarily ground-breaking.
Multi-Touch control of playback
The ability to preview programs on remote panel while watching TV.
Advanced Electronic Program Guide.
Siri Voice Control for easy search and record setup.
Multi-touch for fullscreen gaming.
Web browsing Keyboard.
All-in-One Home theatre control.

With such a device the possibilities are seemingly endless.

Just a thought

nuckinfutz
Mar 5, 2012, 06:16 PM
Steve disliked 7" tablets but he didn't say anything negative about 7.85" tablets

gigaguy
Mar 5, 2012, 07:40 PM
sorry didn't read all 8 pages, but I read 3.
Don't know if Apple will offer a smaller 'iPad' but I would strongly disagree with the reason being to compete with cheaper tablets.
Since when did Apple feel like they had to offer a cheaper notebook, or a cheaper desktop to match the lower prices of Dell (who?) or HP (who?). Apple has Never competed on price, it's not their model at all.
I'd hate to see it happen, because then Apple is a follower. I like their method of creating unique and better and saying we don't care what others are doing, we're doing the Apple thing.
If they want to offer a decontented 10" iPad, that's bowing enough to competition. Do you really think Apple needs the money or market share for economy tablets?.
copying others' categories and segments to 'compete' is not what Apple does well.
It's hard enough to imagine a post PC world on a 10" screen, hate to think people will think a 4-7" screen is enough to get their computing needs. I personally use the 10" iPad and a 52" HDTV looked to a Mac Mini and an iPhone for calls mainly, don;t need no other sizes.

nuckinfutz
Mar 5, 2012, 07:44 PM
Put it this way

Google wants to basically give away Android phones in order to reap the rewards in advertising revenue.

Apple wants to make a profit off of their hardware and then have you use their stores where they get a 30% cut.

They (Apple) have EVERY incentive to move the iPad line into a cheaper price strata.

Look at how Apple refusing to support mobile Flash killed it. There is strength in numbers and each platform is trying to gain numbers for different reasons.

ShiftyPig
Mar 5, 2012, 07:49 PM
That has to go down as one of the laziest mock-ups I've ever seen.

Step 1: Insert ruler next to image of iPad.
Step 2: Done.

twoodcc
Mar 5, 2012, 08:50 PM
i wouldn't mind seeing a smaller iPad. i doubt it will happen, but that would give more choice to consumers

jackc
Mar 5, 2012, 09:22 PM
I can justify having the current size iPad along with an iPhone (and it seems like an extravagant purchase), but any smaller and I'd feel a little foolish having both.

However, I see no reason not to cater to the market that will surely buy it.

AidenShaw
Mar 5, 2012, 09:30 PM
I can justify having the current size iPad along with an iPhone (and it seems like an extravagant purchase), but any smaller and I'd feel a little foolish having both.

However, I see no reason not to cater to the market that will surely buy it.

But that's contrary to the "if I don't want it nobody should have it" attitude that's become prevalent on MacRumours.

I miss the days when MacRumours had rumours about Macs.

Apple...
Mar 5, 2012, 10:10 PM
Digitime is probably one of the most reliable sources out there. They are not in business of attracting page clicks by publishing Apple rumors (like many other web sites are). They publish news for Taiwan semiconductor/electronics industry (the companies that supply a lot of components to Apple and others). They may get some stuff wrong (as anybody) but they will not publish some unchecked sensational news just because it's about Apple.
Close call (http://daringfireball.net/linked/2012/01/06/digitimes-chowder).

kdarling
Mar 5, 2012, 11:07 PM
I can justify having the current size iPad along with an iPhone (and it seems like an extravagant purchase), but any smaller and I'd feel a little foolish having both.

Why so? (Not the extravagant part, but the foolish part.) There's nothing wrong with having more than one size of something. In fact, it's often preferable.

I have a house and family, and therefore I have a need for multiple sizes and types of everything from TVs to beds to radios to gaming machines to pots and pans :)

In the same vein, we have multiple iPod touches and iPads and eReaders and 7" tablets. Each fits someones's needs in different situations. That's just normal life.

Cheers!

gnasher729
Mar 6, 2012, 03:44 AM
Digitime is probably one of the most reliable sources out there.

Wrong.

They are not in business of attracting page clicks by publishing Apple rumors (like many other web sites are).

Misleading. They are in the business of producing "news" for the Taiwan semiconductor/electronics industry, say they have the same interest in gossip.

They may get some stuff wrong (as anybody) but they will not publish some unchecked sensational news just because it's about Apple.

Wrong. They go a step further and make up unchecked sensational news about Apple.



Rinse ..lather repeat. I've heard the naysayers at every level.

Apple's not going to do a phone. They can't beat Nokia
Apple's not going to do Tablets...everyone has failed there

What really matters is "Does it makes sense?"

The case for a smaller iPad is pretty clear if you look at it objectively. Kindles don't come in just one size so why should a more general purpose device like an iPad come in one size?

I never said anything about whether I believe Apple would build a smaller iPad or not. What I did was rejecting your argument that there were "multiple sources", because all the sources lead back to DigiTimes which is known to make it up as it comes. And your arguments seem confusing. You refer to naysayers who said Apple can't do this, Apple can't do that, while the situation here is exactly the opposite.

Genetheninja
Mar 6, 2012, 07:40 AM
It IS a great idea. I personally wouldn't want to use one but a lot of people I know bought a different tablet because of the purse complaint. The iPad doesn't fit in a purse plain and simple.
I however would buy one because I have a special needs child and the iPad is a really great learning tool for him. I would buy one that is a little smaller and cheaper for him to use all the time because lets face it THE IPAD IS VERY EXPENSIVE!

hstewart
Mar 6, 2012, 08:11 AM
What is peoples obsession with having bigger phones and smaller tablets? I don't get it.

This is just created by bunch of robots trying to flood the market with confusion - so there is no real standard out there for Smartphones and Tablets.

Shadyriley
Mar 6, 2012, 08:19 AM
I would love a 7.85 inch iPad to COMPLEMENT my iPad HD, I would take the mini when I go out an leave the iPad HD at home. Lots of people who have iPads will also want the iPad mini.

Mattie Num Nums
Mar 6, 2012, 09:04 AM
I miss the days when MacRumours had rumours about Macs.

Whats a Mac? :eek:

The Economist
Mar 6, 2012, 06:09 PM
It's not iPad Mini, it's iPad Micro. After all it's smaller than modern phones.

Maybe they'll just rename it as the iPad Nano, a new magical and revolutionary device. :D

Illumination
Mar 6, 2012, 07:19 PM
Why do the people who like their 10 inch iPads care if there's a smaller one? It's not like it's personally offending you or something.

MacinDoc
Mar 6, 2012, 07:33 PM
Maybe they'll just rename it as the iPad Nano, a new magical and revolutionary device. :D
iPad Mini, I can see, but the term "iPad Nano" gives me visions of a device smaller than the iPod Touch.

----------

But that's contrary to the "if I don't want it nobody should have it" attitude that's become prevalent on MacRumours.

I miss the days when MacRumours had rumours about Macs.
Perhaps MacRumors should split into three entities: MacRumors, iOSRumors, and iSueRumors. ;)

zephyrnoid
Mar 6, 2012, 11:01 PM
TV

the only trouble with all this talk of Apple & TV in the same sentence is....
TV IS DEAD
The big story is that movies have jumped ship from your TV to the Internet,
broadcast TV IS DEAD.
Long live Broadcast TV!

Look, after being hugely disillusioned by the false promise of Cable and Fiber Broadcast and the flight from TV of the blockbuster producers both in the US and the UK, I'm certain that Apple is not into TV any more.

You and I are the content and the Internet the gateway.
all we need now is.....

MORE HIGH DEF OVER A WIDER FASTER BROADBAND CHANNEL 24/7 WITH WIRELESS DEVICE CONNECTIVITY.

Gimme that and I'll lay a kingdom at your feet :)