PDA

View Full Version : Apple Reportedly Looking to Launch ‘iPad Mini’ Priced at $249-$299 in Q3




Pages : [1] 2

MacRumors
Apr 16, 2012, 08:22 AM
http://images.macrumors.com/im/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2012/04/16/apple-reportedly-looking-to-launch-ipad-mini-priced-at-249-299-in-q3/)


Kotaku reports (http://kotaku.com/5902232/rumors-of-an-ipad-mini-swirl-in-china) on claims (http://game.163.com/12/0416/11/7V78MDSB00314OSE.html) [Google translation (http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http://game.163.com/12/0416/11/7V78MDSB00314OSE.html&hl=en&langpair=auto%7Cen)] from Chinese web portal NetEase regarding Apple's plans for the launch of a smaller "iPad mini" in the third quarter of this year. According to the report, Apple is planning to launch with six million units of the device at a price of either $249 or $299 in order to combat forthcoming Windows 8 products, although smaller Android tablets such as Amazon's Kindle Fire have also been viewed as targets for Apple.NetEase claimed that the device will be released around the third quarter of this year to "counter attack" the upcoming Windows tablets. The report further claims that the devices will cost anywhere from US$249 to $299 and that there will be an initial 6 million units ready for launch.The well-connected John Gruber has claimed that Apple has a 7.85-inch iPad in its labs (http://www.macrumors.com/2012/04/05/apple-does-have-a-7-85-ipad-in-their-labs/), but he does not know whether the product will ever make it to market. Various claims of Apple moving closer to production (http://www.macrumors.com/2012/03/05/production-of-7-85-inch-ipad-reportedly-moving-closer-as-more-suppliers-named/) of the smaller iPad have also been surfacing as rumors continue to swirl.

http://images.macrumors.com/article-new/2011/12/iPad-Mini-comparison-t.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 mini" next to iPad 2 (courtesy of CiccareseDesign)
Last December, we posted a paper mockup (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/12/23/this-is-what-a-7-85-inch-ipad-looks-and-feels-like/) showing what a 7.85-inch iPad would look and feel like, coming to the conclusion that onscreen elements would remain usable even as the standard iPad resolution of 1024x768 was squeezed into a 7.85-inch display rather than a 9.7-inch screen. A 7.85-inch "iPad mini" display with a resolution of 1024x768 would carry a pixel density of 163 pixels per inch (http://www.macrumors.com/2012/03/27/why-a-7-85-screen-for-the-rumored-ipad-mini-makes-sense/), exactly the same density as the non-Retina iPhone and iPod touch models. Consequently, content meeting Apple's interface guidelines would display at acceptable sizes on such a display.

Article Link: Apple Reportedly Looking to Launch ‘iPad Mini’ Priced at $249-$299 in Q3 (http://www.macrumors.com/2012/04/16/apple-reportedly-looking-to-launch-ipad-mini-priced-at-249-299-in-q3/)



Epic Xbox Revie
Apr 16, 2012, 08:23 AM
April Fools!

mgs4
Apr 16, 2012, 08:24 AM
dont know about you, but personally i still dont see much point in a smaller ipad.

Michaelgtrusa
Apr 16, 2012, 08:24 AM
Good idea.

Adidas Addict
Apr 16, 2012, 08:24 AM
Smaller? What a rubbish idea, could go a 12" iPad though.

JamerTheProgram
Apr 16, 2012, 08:26 AM
Wouldn't that be a little disrespectful to Steve Jobs?
He said he didn't like 7 inch tablets... (Didnt he? Or am I imagining it? :s)

CylonGlitch
Apr 16, 2012, 08:26 AM
Smaller, but still doesn't fit in the pocket. If you're going to be carrying something the iPad, as it it, is great. But then again, at the price range, they are going directly after the Kindle; maybe it would change a lot?

VenusianSky
Apr 16, 2012, 08:26 AM
Maybe if you have both, they can team up like Batman & Robin and defeat the criminals on the internet... or the trolls. :p

Marbles1
Apr 16, 2012, 08:27 AM
Not useful for me, but if it occupies a pricing sweet spot, then it should pick up a good few buyers, especially the 'Dad I want an Ipad' legion of kids.

macduke
Apr 16, 2012, 08:27 AM
Honestly, I wouldn't mind a 12" iPad Pro with quad-core processor, 2GB ram, 128GB of storage, 802.11ac WIFI, and pressure sensitivity for creating artwork. But will it happen? I can dream.

I'm going to give my idea to DigiTimes and tell them I'm an analyst. Expect a post in about 45 minutes.

ECUpirate44
Apr 16, 2012, 08:28 AM
Haven't believed this rumor since it first came out.

Cheebo
Apr 16, 2012, 08:28 AM
I'd love a tiny iPad but after using a retina iPhone & iPad I could never go to a non-retina screen such as this.

arcite
Apr 16, 2012, 08:29 AM
Wouldn't that be a little disrespectful to Steve Jobs?
He said he didn't like 7 inch tablets... (Didnt he? Or am I imagining it? :s)

No disrespect, but the dead tell no tales.

Apple is a market leader and has control over the supply chain. I would love to see a smaller, cheaper iPad. I have tried the Samsungs and they are no interest to me. Bring on the iPad mini! Destroy Amazon!:D

FSMBP
Apr 16, 2012, 08:32 AM
Wouldn't that be a little disrespectful to Steve Jobs?
He said he didn't like 7 inch tablets... (Didnt he? Or am I imagining it? :s)

Steve also said 3rd Party Apps are not needed for the iPhone (then, in 2008 they introduced the App Store). Also, he said no one would want to watch video on an iPod (then, they introduced the video iPod a year later).

And "disrespectful"? This is a business - if Apple sees a good enough market for a 7.5" cheaper tablet, why wouldn't it take it? Apple has high standards & only release products that meet those standards - it's like not they're Toshiba and release products willy-nilly hoping they will work.

thekeyring
Apr 16, 2012, 08:32 AM
New iPad hardware wouldn't target people who want Windows 8 tablets: iOS 6 would.

I'm pretty sure if people are going to choose Windows 8 tablets, it's because they're running Windows 8, not because they have smaller screens.

Also, loving the fact they put the picture of the iPad at two different sizes. Ace photoshopping there. ;)

newagemac
Apr 16, 2012, 08:32 AM
Wouldn't that be a little disrespectful to Steve Jobs?
He said he didn't like 7 inch tablets... (Didnt he? Or am I imagining it? :s)

Not really. This one is approximately 8". :D

AAPLaday
Apr 16, 2012, 08:32 AM
Reckon there's more chance of a 4" iPhone

Menel
Apr 16, 2012, 08:33 AM
Seems like a likely target for the new die shrunk 32nm A5 we've seen floating around in the iPad2/ATV3.

But would you buy a new Apple non-retina device knowing in a year or two would likely go Retina.

For launch, at that price, a 326 ppi device is probably off the table, but in a year or two... these HIDPI 'retina' panels are going to be dropping in price.

Zunjine
Apr 16, 2012, 08:33 AM
I think the 9-10 inch size is pretty much perfect but then it's clear that many people have taken to the smaller, 7 inch, size. I can imagine some uses for such a device but, for my needs, it sacrifices too much in flexibility for what it gains in portability. This, of course, depends on what you use it for. If I were a more casual user with a greater focus on reading books and basic web browsing and a lesser focus on complex apps and content creation the sums may well add up differently.

The shape matters too. I've played a bit with a friend's Playbook. It's a very nice device. Solidly built with a very nice screen. It felt very small to my hands and eyes, accustomed as they are to the iPad, but it was the wideness of the screen which seemed most restrictive. It felt like a letterbox compared to the broader, more square shape of the iPad.

Perhaps a 7.85 inch device with the same aspect ratio as the iPad would be a better compromise. Larger than a 7 inch device and less narrow. At a sub $300 price point, as long as they get it right on the specs, the iPad mini could be a hit.

ugahairydawgs
Apr 16, 2012, 08:34 AM
I'm guessing this will probably never see the light of day, but if it does I'll be first in line to get one. I like the current iPad, but I've always wished it were a little smaller.

byke
Apr 16, 2012, 08:34 AM
"hey love, I finally got you an iPad too"

A great present for us men who don't want to have to splash out for a full iPad.

Dillenger
Apr 16, 2012, 08:34 AM
Finally, something worth while wearing around my neck, ;) It could be called the iBling.

*LTD*
Apr 16, 2012, 08:34 AM
New iPad hardware wouldn't target people who want Windows 8 tablets: iOS 6 would.

I'm pretty sure if people are going to choose Windows 8 tablets, it's because they're running Windows 8, not because they have smaller screens.

It remains to be seen whether they'll choose Windows 8 tablets at all.

shaunp
Apr 16, 2012, 08:36 AM
dont know about you, but personally i still dont see much point in a smaller ipad.

Down to personal taste I guess. I prefer using a Kindle if I"m stood up on the tube, or just on the tube in general as it's smaller. I can see a smaller iPad being useful for busy commutes.

Glideslope
Apr 16, 2012, 08:38 AM
"The Assimilation will soon be complete".

OutSpoken
Apr 16, 2012, 08:38 AM
Not useful for me, but if it occupies a pricing sweet spot, then it should pick up a good few buyers, especially the 'Dad I want an Ipad' legion of kids.



Yeah i thought of kids xmas pressie when reading about this.

At the moment I have twin 3yr old boys who can't get enough from my new iPad, always wantig a go.. would love to splash out and buy them one each...but I think giving really young kids an expensive gift like an iPad is really excessive... but a dinky mini iPad at a lower price might not be that bad... Then again, if Apple do a price slash of the iPod touch, that'll probably be even better.

kavika411
Apr 16, 2012, 08:39 AM
This would be perfect for me.

I have to have a full-scale Mac for my work. I have really enjoyed how light, portable and dependable my 13" Air has been. On the other end of the spectrum, I've had and enjoyed an iPhone since June 29, 2007. While I have really, really wanted an iPad, I haven't been able to justify actually needing one. A $250 price price-point, and a size substantially smaller than my Air, would fit that price and size gap between my Air and iPhone nicely. I really, really hope this rumor is true.

byke
Apr 16, 2012, 08:40 AM
iPad touch

PinkyMacGodess
Apr 16, 2012, 08:40 AM
While this sounds good, I think it's a mistake.

Apple has chuckled about Android fragmentation and observed the mess that Google, et al, are in, and now they want to dirty their water by introducing something else that will fragment their market? Why?

Zunjine
Apr 16, 2012, 08:41 AM
Honestly, I wouldn't mind a 12" iPad Pro with quad-core processor, 2GB ram, 128GB of storage, 802.11ac WIFI, and pressure sensitivity for creating artwork. But will it happen? I can dream.

I'm going to give my idea to DigiTimes and tell them I'm an analyst. Expect a post in about 45 minutes.

I struggle to see myself using a tablet that large. Sure, pressure sensitivity would be cool and I'd love a larger storage size but 12" is BIG. I've seen people, apparently in all seriousness, asking for a 15" iPad! I'm sure there comes a point when it just isn't a mobile device anymore. It may well be portable as it doesn't need to be plugged in or use an external display or input method, but not really mobile.

A mobile device in this sense is different from a portable device. A laptop is portable but you can't easily use it while sitting on a cramped train or walking down the road. A mobile device, on the other hand, I feel should be something you can pull out of a bag and use in almost any reasonable circumstances.

I accept that this is not a universally accepted distinction so I'd be curious to know what everyone else thinks.

tasset
Apr 16, 2012, 08:44 AM
I could be interested, depending on what tradeoffs there would be other than screen size and resolution. My ideal scenario (and it may not happen until 2nd or 3rd gen) is a replacement for both my iPhone and iPad. I would rather carry around one device. But not if I have to sacrifice LTE connectivity, GPS, or a decent camera.

jonnyb
Apr 16, 2012, 08:44 AM
While this sounds good, I think it's a mistake.

Apple has chuckled about Android fragmentation and observed the mess that Google, et al, are in, and now they want to dirty their water by introducing something else that will fragment their market? Why?

This isn't fragmentation in the sense that we talk about Android fragmentation. This is introducing another product into a line. It would still run iOS5.

The introduction of the iPod mini wasn't fragmentation; it was just the introduction of another, smaller product into the iPod family.

I know of two people in my office who'd like a smaller iPad. They are both women who want something more handbag-sized. They both say the current iPad is too big for them to consider. Seems perfectly reasonable to me.

dbalone
Apr 16, 2012, 08:45 AM
This sounds more like an iPod Touch MAXI not an iPad MINI.

gnasher729
Apr 16, 2012, 08:45 AM
Wouldn't that be a little disrespectful to Steve Jobs?
He said he didn't like 7 inch tablets... (Didnt he? Or am I imagining it? :s)

Let me explain this: 1. Steve Jobs saying that he didn't like something, or Apple would never do something, always has meant that Apple wouldn't do this until they did. "An iPod will never play videos". "We will never make a phone". "Apple will never create a tablet computer". 2. Times are changing, so even without (1), the fact that Steve Jobs didn't like something means it was a bad idea at that time, which doesn't mean it's a bad idea today. That's why people including me are rating you down.

On the other hand, a 7 inch tablet is still a bad idea. That's why Apple won't do it, not because Steve Jobs once said he didn't like it.

Dionte
Apr 16, 2012, 08:48 AM
Instead it's gonna be the iPhone HD.

SwiftLives
Apr 16, 2012, 08:50 AM
A cheaper price point would probably cannibalize the 10in. iPad's sales. I see no market or reason for this product other than a defensive move against rivals. And I honestly can't think of Apple ever releasing a product strictly as a defensive move. Hell - they don't even acknowledge rivals in their advertising.

I have doubts that this product will ever be released.

Zunjine
Apr 16, 2012, 08:50 AM
Let me explain this: 1. Steve Jobs saying that he didn't like something, or Apple would never do something, always has meant that Apple wouldn't do this until they did. "An iPod will never play videos". "We will never make a phone". "Apple will never create a tablet computer". 2. Times are changing, so even without (1), the fact that Steve Jobs didn't like something means it was a bad idea at that time, which doesn't mean it's a bad idea today. That's why people including me are rating you down.

On the other hand, a 7 inch tablet is still a bad idea. That's why Apple won't do it, not because Steve Jobs once said he didn't like it.

Also worth baring in mind that Steve was never the only person who's opinion mattered. He was open to peruasion on some issues, the App Store being perhaps the most notable example.

Steve didn't like the 7 inch tablets but then he once said that the only reason to have a tablet computer was to be able to read emails on the toilet! It may well be that it wasn't him who championed the tablet format initially. It's possible he had already had his mind changed on the issue of 7 inch tablets before he died. We probably will never know.

MacDarcy
Apr 16, 2012, 08:52 AM
Too big to be a iphone. Too small to be a ipad. It's an iPhad! Doh!

Of course if Apple makes it, it will sell...but personally the current size ipad is perfect for me. I will nab me a new iphone 5 if it comes with a 4" screen tho. :-)

slu
Apr 16, 2012, 08:53 AM
Does every single rumor article have to mention Gruber? It is very tiresome.

Gregintosh
Apr 16, 2012, 08:53 AM
I must say the evidence looks like it may happen. I don't know about $249 pricing though. I guess it would have to be stripped down heavily (non retina, 8GB, 512 RAM, no cameras, etc.) so that people still think $499-$829 is a good price to pay with this $249 version available.

This would go against more than just Steve Jobs. For the first time, Apple would be making a product without a good user experience by design.

Small White Car
Apr 16, 2012, 08:53 AM
I'd absolutely buy this for my kid. In addition, there's no way I wouldn't buy the full-sized iPad for myself.

This might not be the worst idea.

Abazigal
Apr 16, 2012, 08:56 AM
Wouldn't that be a little disrespectful to Steve Jobs?
He said he didn't like 7 inch tablets... (Didnt he? Or am I imagining it? :s)

Who cares, the guy's dead.

Let the new CEO run Apple the way he deems fit, not the way Steve would have run it. :)

Besides, it's apple. Build it, and they will buy it. :D

Radio
Apr 16, 2012, 08:56 AM
Sure why not? Just hit all demographics and call it a day

jclardy
Apr 16, 2012, 08:57 AM
I think this could really work well for Apple.

Releasing a 7" iPad for $249 would completely mop the floor with anything Google or Amazon did. The Kindle Fire is nice for $200, but in terms of software responsiveness it is on par with iPad 1. I think the Mini iPad would essentially have iPad 2 hardware in a smaller form factor.

The main pros for this new iPad would be:
- Smaller (slightly more portable, women could carry it in pocketbooks, might fit in mens coat pockets)
- Cheaper (this is the biggest point. It would introduce a ton of people into Apple's ecosystem)
- Lighter (Better for tasks like reading and such.)

The primary drawback would be the smaller on screen keyboard which would be much less useful in landscape, although thumb typing should be faster. But I assume they would also include a mic to push Siri into more peoples hands when they update it in iOS 6.

And to those speaking of fragmentation, it has already been covered in an article. Apple could keep this tablet at 1024x768, which would make the screen 163PPI, or that same as non-retina iPhones. Which means that touchscreen buttons would be sized like they are on the iPhone (in terms of physical size, they are all the same pixel size).

iPad apps would look exactly the same, only slightly smaller. iPhone apps would display the same as they do on the current iPad.

Rocketman
Apr 16, 2012, 08:59 AM
This actually appeals to me. I think I'll get one just because and see how it goes. The cost is trivial and the value is immediate and obvious. More portable than an iPad. I am always amused by folks recording the President's speeches with an iPad. Product placement? Don't they know it's on C-SPAN?

Rocketman

scarred
Apr 16, 2012, 08:59 AM
A cheaper price point would probably cannibalize the 10in. iPad's sales. I see no market or reason for this product other than a defensive move against rivals. And I honestly can't think of Apple ever releasing a product strictly as a defensive move. Hell - they don't even acknowledge rivals in their advertising.

I have doubts that this product will ever be released.

If they spec it properly, it might not cannibalize their 10inch sales much at all. For example, it could come with just 8 gigs of memory.

Lesser Evets
Apr 16, 2012, 09:00 AM
My question is... what happens to the iPod Touch?

It can't continue this ludicrous $199 price, not for an intro. A $249 or even $299 iPad Mini will just eat that alive. I could see an iPad Mini for $249, with most all cameras stripped down along with all hardware, being a good grab, but it's nothing to sing about.

All this tech will slide down the price range as the iPad becomes closer to a laptop/iMac in capability. The iPad is destined to become the iMac of 2020, for most all people that use computers. I expect a larger divide between low-end Macs and Pros, if they continue doing Pro computers much longer. There will always be room and need for Mac Pros, but the market will get slimmer and slimmer since 99% of people won't need anything like a Pro by next decade.

slnko-v-sieti
Apr 16, 2012, 09:00 AM
A cheap iPad to compete with Kindle and lock more people into the iTunes/iOS store ecosystem?

Only thing that makes sense! :cool:

tekno
Apr 16, 2012, 09:03 AM
Who cares, the guy's dead.

Let the new CEO run Apple the way he deems fit, not the way Steve would have run it. :)

Besides, it's apple. Build it, and they will buy it. :D

I agree. If Apple is going to be run in a way whereby they try and second-guess what Steve Jobbs would have done, it can only end in tears.

He's gone and there's a new team in charge who need to have the freedom to use what they've learnt at their time at Apple to keep the company moving forward.

Frobozz
Apr 16, 2012, 09:03 AM
Based on the math presented, this seems like a likely size.

I guess I'm not in the market for a compromise device. But I can imagine this might fit the bill for people on a budget, or for people who don't have an iPhone but crave portability?

I'm sure this is driven by price point more than anything. Apple's BOD probably asked the team to figure out how to hit $249 with an iPad.

Bear
Apr 16, 2012, 09:03 AM
dont know about you, but personally i still dont see much point in a smaller ipad.I actually do see a smaller iPad being viable product.

Wouldn't that be a little disrespectful to Steve Jobs?
He said he didn't like 7 inch tablets... (Didnt he? Or am I imagining it? :s)I'm not sure what the actual reason was, but I suspect it may have had something to do with screen technology and not a high enough resolution on a smaller screen just yet.

Smaller, but still doesn't fit in the pocket. If you're going to be carrying something the iPad, as it it, is great. But then again, at the price range, they are going directly after the Kindle; maybe it would change a lot?It depends on the pocket. My jacket and coat pockets tend to be large enough. Also, think of women's handbags - the 10" iPad might not fit so well where a 7" one would. ANd yes the Kindle Fire proves there's a market for a 7" iPad

Down to personal taste I guess. I prefer using a Kindle if I"m stood up on the tube, or just on the tube in general as it's smaller. I can see a smaller iPad being useful for busy commutes.A rather good point.

dont know about you, but personally i still dont see much point in a smaller ipad.

Wouldn't that be a little disrespectful to Steve Jobs?
He said he didn't like 7 inch tablets... (Didnt he? Or am I imagining it? :s)

Smaller, but still doesn't fit in the pocket. If you're going to be carrying something the iPad, as it it, is great. But then again, at the price range, they are going directly after the Kindle; maybe it would change a lot?

While this sounds good, I think it's a mistake.

Apple has chuckled about Android fragmentation and observed the mess that Google, et al, are in, and now they want to dirty their water by introducing something else that will fragment their market? Why?A 7" iPad at the same resolution as the iPad 1 and 2 will not cause market fragmentation. The Android fragmentation is partially the numerous different screen sizes and resolutions. It's all the fact that not every Android device gets Android updates and the various customizations that each Android manufacturer has made.

I'd absolutely buy this for my kid. In addition, there's no way I wouldn't buy the full-sized iPad for myself.

This might not be the worst idea.This makes a lot of sense, especially if a 7" iPad is near the price of the iPod Touch.

303aegiszx
Apr 16, 2012, 09:05 AM
Smaller? What a rubbish idea, could go a 12" iPad though.

Do you realize how big 12" is? Might as well go use a laptop.

12"...That is MASSIVE. For a portable device, it should in no way be bigger than 11". There's a reason why these products rely heavily on R&D.

For many users, 7-10" is perfect. It is the right sizing.

Tablets are meant to be, and should be, the size of a notepad, agenda, contact book, sketch book, etc.

essential
Apr 16, 2012, 09:06 AM
Many of you might think this sounds crazy, but I've wanted to figure out of way to put an iPad in my dash of my car instead of a CD Player, but the iPad size is just to big to fit. A touch is to small and a full sized iPad is to big, an iPad-mini might just do the trick, and it would be awesome if possible.

I'm all down for larger product lines, various size iPads and iPhones.

mattg3
Apr 16, 2012, 09:07 AM
If it has retina display the competition might as well throw in the towel.

bushido
Apr 16, 2012, 09:07 AM
dont know about you, but personally i still dont see much point in a smaller ipad.

better to read books, i got an iPad 2 but i still bought an Kindle a few weeks ago because its just easier to read and to carry

Elbon
Apr 16, 2012, 09:12 AM
I'd consider buying one of these. I don't need or want a full-size iPad, and the iPod Touch is a bit too small for things like watching movies or reading e-books. Price point is a lot closer to what I'd be willing to spend, too.

MTShipp
Apr 16, 2012, 09:15 AM
Not gonna happen.

madrich
Apr 16, 2012, 09:15 AM
I would buy it. I have an iPod Touch, but like a bigger one. :p

Tyrion
Apr 16, 2012, 09:16 AM
Why would they cripple it out of the gate by making it non-retina? Otherwise it'd be an interesting form factor for those who find the normal iPad too heavy and bulky.

uknowimright
Apr 16, 2012, 09:16 AM
lol @ a 12" iPad, great idea...

oliversl
Apr 16, 2012, 09:16 AM
At 250 US$, the iPod Touch should be gone. I don't really see that 7" iPad happening.

phillipduran
Apr 16, 2012, 09:18 AM
dont know about you, but personally i still dont see much point in a smaller ipad.

PRICE!

I think that is one of the largest points to consider about this. At $250 even the cheapskates cant find a reason to not pick one up.

duffmanth
Apr 16, 2012, 09:19 AM
If Apple came out with a smaller iPad in that $250-300 price range, I would buy it. The current iPads are way too expensive for what I consider a toy that people WANT, but nobody NEEDS.

roasted
Apr 16, 2012, 09:21 AM
If it has retina display the competition might as well throw in the towel.

^ LOL. Yeah, because retina display is the only viable feature on tablets.

Thunderhawks
Apr 16, 2012, 09:21 AM
dont know about you, but personally i still dont see much point in a smaller ipad.

This is for all of those who want a bigger iphone in Android size.

Les Kern
Apr 16, 2012, 09:24 AM
I think the 9-10 inch size is pretty much perfect but then it's clear that many people have taken to the smaller, 7 inch, size. I can imagine some uses for such a device but, for my needs, it sacrifices too much in flexibility for what it gains in portability. This, of course, depends on what you use it for. If I were a more casual user with a greater focus on reading books and basic web browsing and a lesser focus on complex apps and content creation the sums may well add up differently.

The shape matters too. I've played a bit with a friend's Playbook. It's a very nice device. Solidly built with a very nice screen. It felt very small to my hands and eyes, accustomed as they are to the iPad, but it was the wideness of the screen which seemed most restrictive. It felt like a letterbox compared to the broader, more square shape of the iPad.

Perhaps a 7.85 inch device with the same aspect ratio as the iPad would be a better compromise. Larger than a 7 inch device and less narrow. At a sub $300 price point, as long as they get it right on the specs, the iPad mini could be a hit.

Clear thinking.
I just have no idea about this. The first thing that came to mind is that this would just be an answer to the smaller Android offerings, but Apple never really cared about "heading off at the pass". Would it cannibalize the larger iPad share? The price point just might make people buy that over it's cousin, BUT what are the margins? I have a Transformer and like you I don't care for the wider aspect ratio all that much.
This is a tough one.

BlindGoldfish
Apr 16, 2012, 09:25 AM
This actually justifies dropping the numerical aspect in the iPad lineup. You wouldn't want to say iPad 3 and iPad 3 Mini. It's just going to be iPad and iPad Mini (or Nano or whatever).

JustMartin
Apr 16, 2012, 09:25 AM
I've been sceptical about this as well. Seemed to me that something like that would be too big to be pocketable and too small to be useful. But I've just gone and measured a regular old paperback book and that's a smidge under 8 inches. So, I reckon it could be viable. I take my iPod Touch to the gym and watch video as I reckon the iPad is just too big. But, something in between those two sizes might work quite well.

Les Kern
Apr 16, 2012, 09:26 AM
A cheap iPad to compete with Kindle and lock more people into the iTunes/iOS store ecosystem?

Only thing that makes sense! :cool:

Indeed. It IS the only thing that makes sense.

fruitycups
Apr 16, 2012, 09:30 AM
Since when did apple start following the market?
Please dont do this

Ambrose Chapel
Apr 16, 2012, 09:33 AM
It depends on the pocket. My jacket and coat pockets tend to be large enough. Also, think of women's handbags - the 10" iPad might not fit so well where a 7" one would. ANd yes the Kindle Fire proves there's a market for a 7" iPad

A rather good point.

I see so many women on the subway reading a Kindle...don't know how many would use a 7" iPad instead, but I agree that there is definitely a market for 7" devices.

bobenhaus
Apr 16, 2012, 09:34 AM
Image (http://www.macrumors.com/2012/04/16/apple-reportedly-looking-to-launch-ipad-mini-priced-at-249-299-in-q3/)


Kotaku reports (http://kotaku.com/5902232/rumors-of-an-ipad-mini-swirl-in-china) on claims (http://game.163.com/12/0416/11/7V78MDSB00314OSE.html) [Google translation (http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http://game.163.com/12/0416/11/7V78MDSB00314OSE.html&hl=en&langpair=auto%7Cen)] from Chinese web portal NetEase regarding Apple's plans for the launch of a smaller "iPad mini" in the third quarter of this year. According to the report, Apple is planning to launch with six million units of the device at a price of either $249 or $299 in order to combat forthcoming Windows 8 products, although smaller Android tablets such as Amazon's Kindle Fire have also been viewed as targets for Apple.The well-connected John Gruber has claimed that Apple has a 7.85-inch iPad in its labs (http://www.macrumors.com/2012/04/05/apple-does-have-a-7-85-ipad-in-their-labs/), but he does not know whether the product will ever make it to market. Various claims of Apple moving closer to production (http://www.macrumors.com/2012/03/05/production-of-7-85-inch-ipad-reportedly-moving-closer-as-more-suppliers-named/) of the smaller iPad have also been surfacing as rumors continue to swirl.

Image (http://cdn.macrumors.com/article-new/2011/12/iPad-Mini-comparison-t.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 mini" next to iPad 2 (courtesy of CiccareseDesign)
Last December, we posted a paper mockup (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/12/23/this-is-what-a-7-85-inch-ipad-looks-and-feels-like/) showing what a 7.85-inch iPad would look and feel like, coming to the conclusion that onscreen elements would remain usable even as the standard iPad resolution of 1024x768 was squeezed into a 7.85-inch display rather than a 9.7-inch screen. A 7.85-inch "iPad mini" display with a resolution of 1024x768 would carry a pixel density of 163 pixels per inch (http://www.macrumors.com/2012/03/27/why-a-7-85-screen-for-the-rumored-ipad-mini-makes-sense/), exactly the same density as the non-Retina iPhone and iPod touch models. Consequently, content meeting Apple's interface guidelines would display at acceptable sizes on such a display.

Article Link: Apple Reportedly Looking to Launch 'iPad Mini' Priced at $249-$299 in Q3 (http://www.macrumors.com/2012/04/16/apple-reportedly-looking-to-launch-ipad-mini-priced-at-249-299-in-q3/)


Apple is becoming a mass producing machine. This will be the downfall of Apple. No more qaulity but quanity.

fruitycups
Apr 16, 2012, 09:34 AM
Smaller, but still doesn't fit in the pocket. If you're going to be carrying something the iPad, as it it, is great. But then again, at the price range, they are going directly after the Kindle; maybe it would change a lot?

really so apple starts going after the market, since when?

I thought apple was always the one that didn't care about what the market says, but was the one that always created products for perfection..

if apple does this.. there will be too much compromises. apple will start falling apart. lets hope this doesnt happen.

topmounter
Apr 16, 2012, 09:34 AM
"counter attack"...??? oh brother... :rolleyes:

Boisv
Apr 16, 2012, 09:36 AM
Wouldn't that be a little disrespectful to Steve Jobs?
He said he didn't like 7 inch tablets... (Didnt he? Or am I imagining it? :s)

Steve Jobs doesn't know what he wants until you show it to him. :p

PracticalMac
Apr 16, 2012, 09:36 AM
Getting closer to in my hands!

Moonjumper
Apr 16, 2012, 09:37 AM
The iPad UI should still work at 7.85". I think the .85 will make a difference. If they were to do it, the bezel should also be reduced significantly so that the physical size is completely different to the 9.7" iPad.

AppleHater
Apr 16, 2012, 09:37 AM
No disrespect, but the dead tell no tales.

Apple is a market leader and has control over the supply chain. I would love to see a smaller, cheaper iPad. I have tried the Samsungs and they are no interest to me. Bring on the iPad mini! Destroy Amazon!:D

I don't see much point of this. If ever, it's going to be heavily stripped down with features to make the price. They go for big profit margins unlike android manufactures.

Anyway, since when Apple responses to competitors' products, especially haven't even proved to be successful?

Boisv
Apr 16, 2012, 09:39 AM
I don't personally see a need for a smaller tablet either, but the public certainly does. The Kindle is the one and only tablet that's been able to hold it's own against Apple, and it's because of two things, the price and the size.

My Dad, for example, just bought a Kindle Fire after considering an iPad. He wanted something smaller, something lighter and more comfortable to hold for hours while reading a novel. As silly as it seems, as an e-reader the iPad is a bit big.

Mak47
Apr 16, 2012, 09:40 AM
I see this as a good thing, assuming the rumor is true. I would bank on it being essentially an iPad 2 in a smaller size--meant to kill off the existing iPad 2 that is currently still being offered. I'd also expect to see it offered with only 8GB of memory to keep the price down.

It won't lead to fragmentation if it's offered before the iPad 2 is killed off. The resolution of the screen is identical. The only thing I can see potentially needing to be changed would be an additional icon size, to make them fill the screen a bit more--but that's not necessarily a must.

While I personally prefer the retina display and the size of the new iPad, I can understand the fact that other users have different preferences.

Some people simply aren't interested in making the $500+ investment in a full sized iPad. Especially users who want it primarily as a communication device. They don't need a lot of storage, or a large screen.

Schools, who want to use the new iPad textbooks are also great candidates for this smaller, cheaper model. Primarily because of cost.

Then there are the people who simply won't carry a full-sized tablet and won't invest in a mobile device they are just going to keep at home. This smaller size will be more mobile for many people.

I also see it cannibalizing existing iPod Touch sales, which are dropping every year. It makes sense to introduce a new lower priced entry point into the Apple ecosystem.

racer1441
Apr 16, 2012, 09:41 AM
No! Go bigger. Give me my 13 and 15 inch ipad!

rmatthewware
Apr 16, 2012, 09:44 AM
I'd get one for my wife to replace her Kindle Fire. She prefers the iOS environment to Android.

I8P'CS
Apr 16, 2012, 09:45 AM
Count me in on a mini, Can't justify having a iPad,iMac and iPhone so the mini would be used on train journeys,quick browsing etc maybe a few minor games, but knowing me i'll think why not buy the full iPad for 150-100 more, Decisions. Decisions

Ryth
Apr 16, 2012, 09:47 AM
There's a market for it...not sure why people keep saying there isn't. Even if it's somewhat smaller, if Apple can take Kindle market share, it's a win-win.

Also, don't be surprised if this device becomes the iPod Touch or iTouch.

----------

Count me in on a mini, Can justify having a iPad,iMac and iPhone so the mini would be used on train journeys,quick browsing etc maybe a few minor games, but knowing me i'll think why not buy the full iPad for 150-100 more, Decisions. Decisions

If they give it a flash and good camera, then it becomes the go to device for shots over the iPhone and iPad, especially with the better/larger display. Wouldnt be surprised to see it have Retina also...I mean if the iPhone has it...then this would. I would use this on the road for checking shots, video, etc over an iPad..much easy to carry around, drop in a coat/jacket pocket.

kiljoy616
Apr 16, 2012, 09:50 AM
dont know about you, but personally i still dont see much point in a smaller ipad.

Neither do I but with the new Retina it could work for certain usages, Still for reading or watching video for use with kids I could see it work. Not going to get one if it comes out, but I do see a limited cliental. Still I am with you on the merits of this rumor. :rolleyes:

----------

Yeah i thought of kids xmas pressie when reading about this.

At the moment I have twin 3yr old boys who can't get enough from my new iPad, always wantig a go.. would love to splash out and buy them one each...but I think giving really young kids an expensive gift like an iPad is really excessive... but a dinky mini iPad at a lower price might not be that bad... Then again, if Apple do a price slash of the iPod touch, that'll probably be even better.

Apple has no incentive on poor people side of the market. I don't see this happening.

----------

No! Go bigger. Give me my 13 and 15 inch ipad!

13 inch dam now that would be nice, 15 may be to big with weight but 13 could be just perfect for me.

robertosh
Apr 16, 2012, 09:51 AM
Apple counter-attacking? this is new!

johnnyrb
Apr 16, 2012, 09:51 AM
I would only purchase a 7" or 8" iPad if it had a retina display and more than 64gb of RAM.

rmhop81
Apr 16, 2012, 09:54 AM
i'm sure it will probably be $299 and not $249.

downpour
Apr 16, 2012, 09:55 AM
A slightly smaller sized screen isn't really very useful.

We already have iPhones and they fit in your pocket.

That said, these would still be really popular.... but it would be down to the price, not the screen size.

radiohed
Apr 16, 2012, 09:58 AM
I bought a 7" Android tablet, thinking it would be the cat's meow as it would be more portable. I ended up not really liking it. :( I think Steve was correct in saying that a 10" screen is about as small as you can go and still be enjoyable to use. I ended up selling it and now use a retina ipad. :D

Gemtlichkeit
Apr 16, 2012, 10:04 AM
Aren't there cellphone providers that offer phones this large? lol

----------

A slightly smaller sized screen isn't really very useful.

We already have iPhones and they fit in your pocket.

That said, these would still be really popular.... but it would be down to the price, not the screen size.

I've been saying this about netbooks for years. Why do people need a smaller laptop and a larger phone? It's a market that doesn't make sense to me yet people are buying them.

MacRumorUser
Apr 16, 2012, 10:04 AM
Honestly, I wouldn't mind a 12" iPad Pro with quad-core processor, 2GB ram, 128GB of storage, 802.11ac WIFI, and pressure sensitivity for creating artwork. But will it happen? I can dream.

That's funny because I was just talking to a nice chinese guy who works in the local chip shop (take-away) and he said he had a variety of sauces....

So you may be in luck ;)


:)

scades
Apr 16, 2012, 10:06 AM
Everyone's missing the point here. If introduced, it's designed as a Kindle-killer. Assuming it's light enough, it's the iPad people can take to bed for pre-sleep reading. My wife, a confirmed Apple person, uses her Kindle this way, and loads it with books when she travels. The books, of courses, are bought from Amazon's site. Apple wants to shift people back to its book-store, away from Amazon's. If it does everything else the iPad does, that's gravy, but not Apple's intent.

ericrwalker
Apr 16, 2012, 10:07 AM
I hope this report is right. Even at the higher end $299 seems good to me. Finally an iPad for my needs.

macchiato2009
Apr 16, 2012, 10:07 AM
rumors about an iPad "mini" are bull*$*hit

Apple is just starting to launch the new ipad during Q3 in more countries

and the iPad 2 is still on the catalog (16 Gb)

warschauer
Apr 16, 2012, 10:07 AM
I think there would be a huge market for this in education--especially as a primary device in K-12 schools, and, to a lesser extent, as a secondary device among college students.

Ciclismo
Apr 16, 2012, 10:10 AM
If I could use this as an external view-finder for my GH2, that would be awesome. Apart from that though, I am having difficulty visualising how this could fulfil the needs of anyone over 1 meter tall.

NoTricknPAT
Apr 16, 2012, 10:10 AM
Apple has already grasped so much of the tablet market that a 7.85 inch ipad would make perfect since at a low price point. The smaller ipad obviously would not have the same high end processing power as the new ipad or ipad 2. Think the original ipad with the A4 processor just enough to tease the user to want to upgrade the higher end model with a larger display. This would be good for students with the ibookstore or for web browsing, media playing, and light gaming. This would not fragment the iOS because everything would still be the same developers would just need to tweak their apps just as they did when the retina display ipad came out. In my opinion Google is responsible for the fragmentation of Android. I blame the OEMs and unfortunately Google allows them to do so.

mattroman246
Apr 16, 2012, 10:12 AM
Isn't the iPod touch already the iPad mini, or will that now be the iPad nano? lol

fredf
Apr 16, 2012, 10:14 AM
Wouldn't that be a little disrespectful to Steve Jobs?
He said he didn't like 7 inch tablets... (Didnt he? Or am I imagining it? :s)

Completely absurd comment. What is this fetish about Steve Jobs? The world has come to an end and there can be no further innovations that were not foreseen by the god?

applesith
Apr 16, 2012, 10:16 AM
I can't see Apple changing the iPhone screen size AND offering another sized iPad. This screams fragmentation even if aspect ratios remain the same. I think an increased iPhone screen will happen before an iPad mini is introduced.

Personally, I'd actually love a larger 15 inch retina iPad with having the ability to open multiple apps open at once and a larger keyboard display. I know this won't happen, but I'd rather have that then a smaller iPad.

nilk
Apr 16, 2012, 10:16 AM
The big question is what effect the shrinking of touch areas will have on existing iPad apps? For example, will apps with virtual music instruments be less usable?

One of the advantages Apple has right now is only a handful of devices to support, making it easier for developers to produce apps because they have less hardware they have to test on than competitors. The more variety they add to this, the less of an advantage they have (though still orders of magnitude better than, say, Android).

If they want to pick up the low end of the market, they should just price the iPad2 at $299 or less, rather than creating a new, potentially inferior form factor.

Stouver
Apr 16, 2012, 10:17 AM
I would buy this for my mom.

jclardy
Apr 16, 2012, 10:18 AM
I bought a 7" Android tablet, thinking it would be the cat's meow as it would be more portable. I ended up not really liking it. :( I think Steve was correct in saying that a 10" screen is about as small as you can go and still be enjoyable to use. I ended up selling it and now use a retina ipad. :D

I don't think you can really compare a 7" android tablet to the possible "iPad Mini" because of:

1. Software
2. Aspect ratio

Pretty much all 7" Android tablets out there are not running 4.0. Most are running some form of modified 2.3. This has many problems, the first of which is that there are no apps designed for 7" tablets, because there is no way to specify that an app was designed for it in Google Play. So developers have no incentive to optimize for tablets. When comparing a 7" Android tablet to iPad in terms of software there really is no comparison.

Second, aspect ratio. 7" Android tablets are all 16:9. Great for video, ok for novels, terrible for everything else. Web pages are too short in landscape, too zoomed out in portrait. PDF's have to be zoomed on every page. The keyboard is too small for two hands in landscape, but too wide for thumbs.

What I am saying is that a 7.85" 4:3 iPad running iOS with the ability to run every iPad app in the app store would be a completely different experience than current 7" Android tablets, in every aspect. Plus at its lower price point it would make a huge impact in the education market.

d0vr
Apr 16, 2012, 10:23 AM
7.8" iReader with non retina LCD/e-ink hybrid and I'll be all over it. I might of been saying this for a while though. Looking forward to watching the "we don't need it" brigade change their tune if it happens.. You know, like they always do.

robertosh
Apr 16, 2012, 10:27 AM
Wouldn't that be a little disrespectful to Steve Jobs?
He said he didn't like 7 inch tablets... (Didnt he? Or am I imagining it? :s)

Jobs said too that the he hated the netbooks and later they release an 11.6 air.. so i think that is possible that a smaller ipad was in his plans.

macse30
Apr 16, 2012, 10:28 AM
I would buy one for my partner right away.

These things are really just touch screens with tons of sensors and network capability. No company can build such a powerful yet affordable I/O device for their specific product. iPads will continue to be used in crazy new ways that we haven't even considered. A new form factor just opens new opportunities. Brilliant.

d0vr
Apr 16, 2012, 10:29 AM
I would only purchase a 7" or 8" iPad if it had a retina display and more than 64gb of RAM.

Surely you are either being sarcastic or just trying to sound like you know what you are talking about by using semi-technical terms. 64gb of RAM? Really? I mean maybe in a decade or so... But in a cheaper device?

I take it you won't be buying one then...

ThomasJL
Apr 16, 2012, 10:29 AM
The iPad Mini is the new Powerbook G5.

d0vr
Apr 16, 2012, 10:33 AM
The big question is what effect the shrinking of touch areas will have on existing iPad apps? For example, will apps with virtual music instruments less usable?

If they want to pick up the low end of the market, they should just price the iPad2 at $299 or less, rather than creating a new, potentially inferior form factor.

Virtual instruments were ever usable? Besides, just because you don't think you want it or will have a use doesn't make it inferior.

nick_elt
Apr 16, 2012, 10:35 AM
Wouldn't that be a little disrespectful to Steve Jobs?
He said he didn't like 7 inch tablets... (Didnt he? Or am I imagining it? :s)

He said alot of things and changed his mind. Besides we need to move on from Steve. As great as he was(prob best visionary ever maybe) companies need fresh ideas to keep moving foward.

griz
Apr 16, 2012, 10:36 AM
This is going to turn out to be one of those "Not what it looks like" rumors.
I still think this is going to be released in conjunction with the real Apple Television. It will be the remote. It will draw people into buying the TV so they can get the iPad. And it will not be sold separately at first. I believe this is what Jobs meant when he "cracked" it.
Playing off the success of the iPad will bring in the audience to the TV. The iPad is a great way to control a TV through the current AppleTV, but not everyone has an iPad.
So in classic Jobs fashion, Tim Cook will reveal 3 new products.
A new Ipad, A new Apple TV, A new Display. A new iPad, A new Apple TV, A new Display. Are you getting it? These are not 3 different products but one new revolutionary device. And the AppleTV will cease to be a "Hobby".

nick_elt
Apr 16, 2012, 10:37 AM
Surely you are either being sarcastic or just trying to sound like you know what you are talking about by using semi-technical terms. 64gb of RAM? Really? I mean maybe in a decade or so... But in a cheaper device?

I take it you won't be buying one then...

Surely he meant 64gb flash storage. 64x ram of the current ipad sounds more like the dreams of an android fan. I mean 2gb ram in the current ipad would be Amazing.

riciad
Apr 16, 2012, 10:38 AM
I'd love to see this happen as I promised 2 of the grandkids that I'd get them iPads next year. One for a birthday present and the other for a confirmation present.
That would make a nice cost saving.

Dwalls90
Apr 16, 2012, 10:39 AM
I don't see how this is feasible. Unless this thing has little to no onboard storage, how could they ever sell it for or less than $299? The iPod Touch sells for $199 and this thing is twice as large! Apple also loves their margins so I fail to see how this keeps up with their strategy of profit maximization.

Plus now that the iPad, iPod and iPhone are all retina, this thing will look like the forgotten middle child.

fred222
Apr 16, 2012, 10:40 AM
Apple's always been big into education, especially now with the textbook push. Equipping grade schools would be a perfect use for this hypothetical device. Also, they say that kids "imprint" on the first operating system they use... I'm sure Apple wants all the young folks to have exposure to iOS so when they're growing up they turn to the same brand and ecosystem for their media consumption, internet browsing / social networking / lolcats, etc. Someone who enjoys using a mini tablet with iOS at school is more likely to want an iPhone, an iPad of their own, will be familiar with the interface of an AppleTV when they see it at walmart and gravitate towards that purchase even if it carries a higher ticket price because it's a "known good," carrying known (implicit carried over brand quality) value.

Edit: Also, another note re comment above on price and capacity. If educational-focused, remember schools tend to have good networking, and iCloud is going to "offshore" most storage needs on fast networks. Also for e-reader uses, that doesn't really require large capacity. Might be able to get by with 8gb of storage only as someone else suggested. Honestly, if you need more for some particular purpose, I'm sure there's devices out there providing additional networked storage for your iDevice...

iSee
Apr 16, 2012, 10:43 AM
I can't see Apple changing the iPhone screen size AND offering another sized iPad. This screams fragmentation even if aspect ratios remain the same. I think an increased iPhone screen will happen before an iPad mini is introduced.

Personally, I'd actually love a larger 15 inch retina iPad with having the ability to open multiple apps open at once and a larger keyboard display. I know this won't happen, but I'd rather have that then a smaller iPad.

The idea people are talking about with the 7.85" iPad is that it will keep exactly the same resolution as the iPad 2 (1024 x 768).
Apparently, this is 163 dpi -- the same as the non-retina iPhone.
So the idea is, apps designed for the existing iPad will work and look good without any redesign, assuming the developer followed Apples HI guidelines. And therefore, no fragmentation.

I guess with the iPhone, they could just make the screen bigger without changing the resolution, which again, would reduce fragmentation, assuming that increasing the size of the UI elements rarely affects the UX significantly.

(Myself, I'm not sure -- I'd need to try it out.)

AppleWarMachine
Apr 16, 2012, 10:44 AM
I"ll buy one for $249 :)

denaliOnDubs
Apr 16, 2012, 10:46 AM
I'd like to see a smaller iPad hit the market. I probably still wouldn't buy it. I've never found a need for anything in between my MacBook Air and my 4s... But that's just me.

mantan
Apr 16, 2012, 11:00 AM
Seems like savvy move. Though it shows how blantantly over priced the iPod Touch market has been.

I bought my wife an iPad for her birthday. The kids (and me) like to use it on occasion...but I wasn't interested in dropping $500-$800 on a second one. But if I could get another one for the kids or me at $249 or $299, I'd be all over it.

I'm sure they'll limit the specs to keep from canibalizing the iPod touch and iPad segments. (I could see it being $249 8 gig wife/$299 8 gig 3G) But as a second/alternate/intro device, it would be very successful.

shanmugam
Apr 16, 2012, 11:05 AM
My worry is what they will cut to reach the price point $249 or $299?

1. Camera(s)? - will be missed for FaceTime
2. Single Core A5 ? not the A5X
3. less RAM? 512MB
4.

???

flashflooder
Apr 16, 2012, 11:05 AM
This move alone would push their stock to $1000 within a year, IMO.

217833
Apr 16, 2012, 11:05 AM
Makes perfect sense to me... With the next iPhone and iPod Touch having a screen no bigger than 4" (almost the same dimensions than the current iPhone), the 7.85" iPad mini and the 9.7" iPad... they should have all usable sizes covered.

No need for larger "phone" and no need for smaller "tablet", it will be a great tablet to fit women purse, as well as cheap enough for kids at school... The modern version of School Tablet:

http://thumbs.dreamstime.com/thumblarge_254/12069930002aW83c.jpg

Perhaps also small enough for very mobile tasks where the iPad 9.7" is more practical for reading/office computing tasks.

No need to redesign current Apps UI that will stay big enough to be used with fingers (even better for small hands... such women, kids, asian market, etc...).

A $299 would make also a perfect sense price wise... just right between the iPod Touch and the first iPad model.

If you add iOS 6, the current gazillions of Apps, the Apple eco-system with iCloud, etc... it will be no reason for anyone to buy a Kindle, Android or even Windows Tablets... And they will definitely kill anyone else if they just release "Gate Keeper" for iOS, to allow anyone to run Apps from the App Store, or from Signed developers, or from anyone.

If you are worry about "Virus/Trojan/etc..." just run your iOS device with AppStore Apps only... If you have a specific need, you can still run Apps from trusted developers... That would also solve App that don't respect Apple AppStore rules, use personal APIs, etc... No need to jailbreak anymore.

And it would be one more step for the merge of OS X and iOS. So, in that large scheme strategy, a iPad mini 7.85" would make sense... And it also makes sense to have Cameras for Facetime (on a $299, since the iPod Touch does also have Cameras), but maybe also a version without Camera (maybe the $249) for the School business...

Spid

mtrctyjoe
Apr 16, 2012, 11:08 AM
Reckon there's more chance of a 4" iPhone

The iPad is a great size for what it does ... and someday could replace the laptop - I could never imagine it getting smaller.

The iPhone however, could get slightly bigger ....

An iPad in the middle seems silly.

notabadname
Apr 16, 2012, 11:10 AM
Could be a nice and affordable alternative to the Touch for my kids. These things beat the heck out of in-car entertainment systems costing far more. Long drives with the kids are so peaceful now. No fighting, each doing their own thing. I love it. Great Christmas present option.

MacConvert07
Apr 16, 2012, 11:11 AM
Ill believe it when I see the parts leaks...

Ryth
Apr 16, 2012, 11:11 AM
Personally, I'd actually love a larger 15 inch retina iPad with having the ability to open multiple apps open at once and a larger keyboard display. I know this won't happen, but I'd rather have that then a smaller iPad.

That's called a laptop.

You'll see the smaller iPad/iTouch before you ever see a 15" tablet.

PinkyMacGodess
Apr 16, 2012, 11:12 AM
This isn't fragmentation in the sense that we talk about Android fragmentation. This is introducing another product into a line. It would still run iOS5.

The introduction of the iPod mini wasn't fragmentation; it was just the introduction of another, smaller product into the iPod family.

I know of two people in my office who'd like a smaller iPad. They are both women who want something more handbag-sized. They both say the current iPad is too big for them to consider. Seems perfectly reasonable to me.

It IS fragmentation when as a programmer you now have to check what device you are running on. It'll not be as easy as 'Oh, I'm on an iPad', it will be 'what size'. They could make a larger iPhone and kill it off nicely or add iPhone capabilities to a smaller iPad, but to make a smaller iPad, I think, could be a bad thing...

One thing, to take a historical look at Apple, that I respected about Steve Jobs return to Apple is that he looked at a company with too many products that was sucking at juggling them all. The 'product creep' seems to be coming back.

But then I am getting older and maybe this is the old codger in me just being in a snit...

bawbac
Apr 16, 2012, 11:12 AM
Smaller? What a rubbish idea, could go a 12" iPad though.

Progression...

http://walyou.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/apple-iboard-imat-design-gadget.jpg

Wie Gehts
Apr 16, 2012, 11:14 AM
iPad displays are the usual lit up ones like all regular monitors, yes?

If so, it must suck to read books from. Perhaps they should make the display turn into e-ink when you want to read a book, if it doesn't do that already.

Ryth
Apr 16, 2012, 11:14 AM
This is going to turn out to be one of those "Not what it looks like" rumors.
I still think this is going to be released in conjunction with the real Apple Television. It will be the remote. It will draw people into buying the TV so they can get the iPad. And it will not be sold separately at first. I believe this is what Jobs meant when he "cracked" it.
Playing off the success of the iPad will bring in the audience to the TV. The iPad is a great way to control a TV through the current AppleTV, but not everyone has an iPad.
So in classic Jobs fashion, Tim Cook will reveal 3 new products.
A new Ipad, A new Apple TV, A new Display. A new iPad, A new Apple TV, A new Display. Are you getting it? These are not 3 different products but one new revolutionary device. And the AppleTV will cease to be a "Hobby".

I agree that I think it's the remote also.

If you watch the Samsung Smart TV ads with them having to sit/stand close to the TV and move their hand, you can totally see how stupid and clueless Samsung is.

The remote/smaller ipad is going to be the interface for the TV. Wouldn't be surprised though that it also becomes another solo device

Halebopp
Apr 16, 2012, 11:15 AM
if this came out I'd plop down < $300 in a heartbeat, tired of my kids stealing my iPad :p

fredf
Apr 16, 2012, 11:20 AM
I don't know if the Kindle is popular because of its size or its price point (likely a bit of both).
But I do know that I would jump at a smaller iPad. But only IF it weren't made to match a price point but rather was a full fledged iPad but smaller.

I still want a fast processor, 15 gig memory and a nice screen. And I'm willing to pay for it. I just want it a bit smaller for portability.

What I don't want is a cheap Android competitor that doesn't give me the 'iPad experience'.

I worry that Apple may (as many here say they would like) just put out a $299 iPad Lesser rather than iPad Mini.

D.T.
Apr 16, 2012, 11:21 AM
My worry is what they will cut to reach the price point $249 or $299?

1. Camera(s)? - will be missed for FaceTime
2. Single Core A5 ? not the A5X
3. less RAM? 512MB
4.

???

Personally I think theyll keep it internally the same as the iPad2: A5, 512MB RAM, same cameras, etc., offer it in 8GB, maybe _only_ one capacity (whether its 8 or 16GB), and maybe change some of the case materials.

Id also see them skipping a cell option on this device too. Make it a tablet in terms of how apps operate, but more like a Touch in terms of no 3G/4G and cheaper materials.

The only things I see being an issue:

Price - theyll want it to be profitable but make sense as part of the whole product lineup (<iPad, >Touch)

Usability - by keeping the 1024x768 they avoid another fragmentation point, tap into a huge app market from day one, but only if theres no issues with smaller screen elements

shanmugam
Apr 16, 2012, 11:24 AM
who would not be able to spend $400.

$249 is a nice price point, remember the 3G/LTE version will be even more.

There is a market with lower price point.

In prepaid market is easy to get some level of 3G internet service than finding a broadband connection. starting point of $529 for iPad 2 + 3G is simply lots of money.

----------

Personally I think theyll keep it internally the same as the iPad2: A5, 512MB RAM, same cameras, etc., offer it in 8GB, maybe _only_ one capacity (whether its 8 or 16GB), and maybe change some of the case materials.

Id also see them skipping a cell option on this device too. Make it a tablet in terms of how apps operate, but more like a Touch in terms of no 3G/4G and cheaper materials.

The only things I see being an issue:

Price - theyll want it to be profitable but make sense as part of the whole product lineup (<iPad, >Touch)

Usability - by keeping the 1024x768 they avoid another fragmentation point, tap into a huge app market from day one, but only if theres no issues with smaller screen elements

1) 16GB is a must, 8GB is simply not enough.

2) other than the screen size, not sure how they will keep the 40% profit margin, hopefully NAND memory is cheap enough.

3) Back camera they might go back to iPhone 3GS camera module

4) I think there will be 3G/LET version with $129 more, simply it is profit there.

5) what are the other options?

Yamcha
Apr 16, 2012, 11:24 AM
I would love for this to be true because of pricing.. And really If it does happen to be true I think Apple will take a huge chunk of even more marketshare..

Why would anyone even consider a Amazon Kindle or Android equivalent If an iPad can be found between $249-299?

cdmoore74
Apr 16, 2012, 11:24 AM
Looks like crappy kindle fires and cheap Android tabs are hurting Apple. If your 9.7 inch bread and butter tab is doing so great why hurt its sales even more? Steve is going to be pissed at Tim when he sees that his fingers are shaven down to nubs.

skellener
Apr 16, 2012, 11:26 AM
Apple Reportedly Looking to Launch 'iPad Mini' Priced at $249-$299 in Q3

Not gonna happen.

Bear
Apr 16, 2012, 11:31 AM
I see this as a good thing, assuming the rumor is true. I would bank on it being essentially an iPad 2 in a smaller size--meant to kill off the existing iPad 2 that is currently still being offered. I'd also expect to see it offered with only 8GB of memory to keep the price down.

It won't lead to fragmentation if it's offered before the iPad 2 is killed off. The resolution of the screen is identical. The only thing I can see potentially needing to be changed would be an additional icon size, to make them fill the screen a bit more--but that's not necessarily a must.

While I personally prefer the retina display and the size of the new iPad, I can understand the fact that other users have different preferences.

Some people simply aren't interested in making the $500+ investment in a full sized iPad. Especially users who want it primarily as a communication device. They don't need a lot of storage, or a large screen.

Schools, who want to use the new iPad textbooks are also great candidates for this smaller, cheaper model. Primarily because of cost.

Then there are the people who simply won't carry a full-sized tablet and won't invest in a mobile device they are just going to keep at home. This smaller size will be more mobile for many people.

I also see it cannibalizing existing iPod Touch sales, which are dropping every year. It makes sense to introduce a new lower priced entry point into the Apple ecosystem.Base on my iPod Touch usage, I would hope for 16GB and 32 GB versions at least. Also, sine the current iPad 2 being offered is 16GB, I don't think a 7" iPad with 16GB is unlikely.

And it could impact iPod Touch sales as my choice would be a new iPod Touch or 7" iPad. Based on my usage as long as the 7" iPad is available in at least 16GB, I will most likely get the 7" iPad and maybe do a battery replacement on my iPod.

I would only purchase a 7" or 8" iPad if it had a retina display and more than 64gb of RAM.That's a personal preference. Personally I'd rather they not add yet another resolution for developers to work with.

Isn't the iPod touch already the iPad mini, or will that now be the iPad nano? lolOr maybe they'll call it the iPod Reader. :D


iPad displays are the usual lit up ones like all regular monitors, yes?

If so, it must suck to read books from. Perhaps they should make the display turn into e-ink when you want to read a book, if it doesn't do that already.If you adjust the brightness and the background color, the iPad and iPod Touch are good for reading books.

Judas1
Apr 16, 2012, 11:38 AM
Some people find tablets limiting, so they use it primarily for reading, surfing the net, and playing games. For reading, a smaller tablet is better. For surfing the net, a bigger tablet is better, but since the resolution will be the same as the ipad 2, it will still work great. And for gaming, the smaller tablet will be better because its lighter and easier to hold. Apple, get that 7.85' iPad out here!

coolspot18
Apr 16, 2012, 11:39 AM
Wouldn't that be a little disrespectful to Steve Jobs?

Time to make way for the next round of innovations.

Casiotone
Apr 16, 2012, 11:47 AM
The idea people are talking about with the 7.85" iPad is that it will keep exactly the same resolution as the iPad 2 (1024 x 768).
Apparently, this is 163 dpi -- the same as the non-retina iPhone.
So the idea is, apps designed for the existing iPad will work and look good without any redesign, assuming the developer followed Apples HI guidelines. And therefore, no fragmentation.

I guess with the iPhone, they could just make the screen bigger without changing the resolution, which again, would reduce fragmentation, assuming that increasing the size of the UI elements rarely affects the UX significantly.

(Myself, I'm not sure -- I'd need to try it out.)

Why do people keep saying that because the resolution would be the same as the iPad 1 it wouldn't cause fragmentation??

If you keep the same resolution and reduce the screen size, you get smaller buttons and targets, while your fingers don't get smaller.

Apple's HIG defines the minimum size of a button target based on the pixel densities of existing iOS devices, relative to the size of the average human finger.

If you take existing iPad apps and put them on a smaller screen, many button targets will fall below the minimum size.

That means that apps would have to be redesigned for this iPad mini, creating yet another transition period where developers will have to make an iPad mini version of their app.

It wouldn't be as bad as what's happening on Android, and many apps wouldn't need that much work to be optimized for the iPad mini, but it would still be fragmentation as developers will have to target yet another screen format when building their apps.

And unlike what Google would like you to believe, there's no way of "automagically" rearange interfaces depending on the screen size and resolution without sacrificing a great deal of UI design efficiency. Just look at all these ugly Android tablet apps that have a lot of wasted blank space.

D.T.
Apr 16, 2012, 11:47 AM
1) 16GB is a must, 8GB is simply not enough.

2) other than the screen size, not sure how they will keep the 40% profit margin, hopefully NAND memory is cheap enough.

3) Back camera they might go back to iPhone 3GS camera module

4) I think there will be 3G/LET version with $129 more, simply it is profit there.

5) what are the other options?


Good analysis. I was thinking 8GB purely as a cost consideration (and it would match the KF), but I agree, 8GB is pretty low, I guess 16GB really is the entry level capacity any more.

Yeah, that profit target I think will be tough with basically just a shrunken down iPad2. They should be able to shave off some cost with an internal redesign, maybe more chip integration, I guess it would have a smaller (cheaper) battery.

I dont think Apple wants to go backwards too much in terms of performance and features just for price sake. Im not sure they want to introduce a new product with an A4 (vs. an A5 or better), low RAM, sub 5 hour runtime, etc.

314631
Apr 16, 2012, 11:53 AM
7.85 inches is too small and won't provide the same satisfying experience of the resolutionary 9.7 inches on iPad 3.

Judas1
Apr 16, 2012, 11:54 AM
Why do people keep saying that because the resolution would be the same as the iPad 1 it wouldn't cause fragmentation??

If you keep the same resolution and reduce the screen size, you get smaller buttons and targets, while your fingers don't get smaller.

Apple's HIG defines the minimum size of a button target based on the pixel densities of existing iOS devices, relative to the size of the average human finger.

If you take existing iPad apps and put them on a smaller screen, many button targets will fall below the minimum size.

That means that apps would have to be redesigned for this iPad mini, creating yet another transition period where developers will have to make an iPad mini version of their app.

It wouldn't be as bad as what's happening on Android, and many apps wouldn't need that much work to be optimized for the iPad mini, but it would still be fragmentation as developers will have to target yet another screen format when building their apps.

And unlike what Google would like you to believe, there's no way of "automagically" rearange interfaces depending on the screen size and resolution without sacrificing a great deal of UI design efficiency. Just look at all these ugly Android tablet apps that have a lot of wasted blank space.
Well, because your fingers can still hit targets on a 3.5" screen. So being that its a 7.85" screen, even if its a small target, I think they'll be able to manage.

TallManNY
Apr 16, 2012, 11:58 AM
If some of the prognosticators are right that we are going to a post-PC world filled with tablet computing, than I think it is a little hard to believe that in this future tablet world that there will only be one size 9.7" and Apple got it perfectly right right off the bat.

I see price reduction in the iPod touch, an iPad Mini and the current iPads. The fragmentation issue that people bring up based on the different sizes is only a problem for developers when the market is small. The iPad market, which seems to be heading over the next several years toward the hundreds of millions of users size, will be big enough that developers can support different sizes.

miniroll32
Apr 16, 2012, 12:12 PM
I can honestly see Apple using the current iPad as a middle-ground for other products. What's to stop them releasing a smaller 7-inch or larger 12-inch model? Absolutely nothing. Some may say "What's the point?", but then people were saying that when the original iPad was released.

ladymacintosh
Apr 16, 2012, 12:15 PM
Smaller, but still doesn't fit in the pocket. If you're going to be carrying something the iPad, as it it, is great. But then again, at the price range, they are going directly after the Kindle; maybe it would change a lot?

But it will fit in my purse!

----------

7.85 inches is too small and won't provide the same satisfying experience of the resolutionary 9.7 inches on iPad 3.

That's kind of a silly statement coming from someone who has an iPhone listed in their signature.

Jibbajabba
Apr 16, 2012, 12:23 PM
Dejavu ... Groundhog day ... Soap re-runs ... Why do the same Rumors keep popping up on MR?

applesith
Apr 16, 2012, 12:26 PM
That's called a laptop.

You'll see the smaller iPad/iTouch before you ever see a 15" tablet.

No, a laptop has a physical keyboard and mouse and closes shut. I'm talking about a big tablet. I never said they would make it and made it very clear that it something I would personally like.

Drag'nGT
Apr 16, 2012, 12:28 PM
These will sell so easily it won't be funny. From a gaming perspective I bet this fits in the hand very nicely.

iOS devices are the hot ticket for Apple. They need to meet the needs (price point helps) of as many customers as possible. If they gap is too large they're loosing sales and market share in the gaps.

Now let's see how much better iOS 6 is for this next year. I still say we email them a list of what's needed. ;)

lathrop4
Apr 16, 2012, 12:29 PM
One target of the smaller version would have to be education. Price being a big factor for schools in tight budget times. If Apple if serious about fulfilling Jobs' desire to reshape our schools through technology (in particular e-text books) a less expense version of an iPad is a must.

andyjam
Apr 16, 2012, 12:29 PM
When will people realise that this is Apple TV? You take a set top box, remove the cables and add a touchscreen. You then partner with a major TV manufacturer (say, Sharp) to develop a system of built in wireless communications, and develop a small wireless device that plugs into other TVs via HDMI (ie the existing Apple TV).

You then create software that allows the TV (or the HDMI box) to take all the inputs (cable, DVD, computers, wireless media drives etc) and route them through the wireless device. This then sorts them, and presents 3-4 different devices through a single AV input and a slick GUI.

Voila! A fully integrated media hub, with a breakthrough interface and incredible simplicity. The thing would be compatible with virtually any cable company and any media input device with HDMI or RGB etc.

You also get past the barrier in terms of pricing. Customers might not be willing to send $2k a year updating their TV, but they sure as hell will spend $200-300 updating the thing that recreates their TV into an Apple media centre.

macse30
Apr 16, 2012, 12:38 PM
Regarding memory, why not do entry level at 8GB and then charge their big markups for more memory? Isn't that their way to increase overall product line profit?

ericinboston
Apr 16, 2012, 12:42 PM
Apple should simply lower the price of the iPad...the only reason to create an iPad "mini" is to offer a rendition of the iPad at a cheaper price than the iPad. Um, we already have 2 of those renditions...the iPhone for $199-$399 and the iPod Touch for the same $199-$399. Sure, they're not the same physical size as the iPad Mini but you see my point. Adding a 4th iPad-type-device is just going to cofuse people and second guess the $50-$100 price differences in all the comparison charts.

The iPods sold at lower prices as the years went on, and I believe the iPads will too. Generation 4 of the iPad should start at $399...sure, profits may dip per unit, but if Apple sells 3x or more units, overall profit increases.

I still feel the iPad is overpriced...regardless of this article/post.

redmac
Apr 16, 2012, 12:43 PM
I am at work and didn't have time to read all the comments. Sorry if someone else mentioned earlier.

If Apple believes iPad is their main post-PC device, they will certainly look for variation in screen sizes. They can't expect to continue dominating a huge new market forever with only one screen size. They will eventually need bigger and smaller screens, pro and cheap hardware variations.

I believe they will soon release a cheap, 7.85" iPad that will target the student market. Remember Apple's big plans for education. In order to make it widespread among schools, they will need a cheap version that schools or families can afford. If that happens, it will come around late summer before the schools start. Soon after that, probably after seeing the market's response, they may release a retina version that will go for $100 more than the standard version. That will kill the hopes of the competition and secure the market leadership for a couple of years.

Menel
Apr 16, 2012, 12:47 PM
iPad displays are the usual lit up ones like all regular monitors, yes?

If so, it must suck to read books from. Perhaps they should make the display turn into e-ink when you want to read a book, if it doesn't do that already.Been under a rock? Yes, iPad has always had an IPS type LCD.

macse30
Apr 16, 2012, 12:48 PM
When will people realise that this is Apple TV? You take a set top box, remove the cables and add a touchscreen.

Here's the other thing you do for Apple TV. You transmit the digital audio signal playing on the TV back to the iPad remote via wifi and use it as reference for your noise cancellation digital signal processing. That filters out the TV sound that Siri would otherwise hear. You don't need to speak louder than the TV because it has already been filtered out from the mic input. Siri problem cracked...

Xero910
Apr 16, 2012, 12:48 PM
Or.. we can wait until next year when the iPad 2 is priced at $299

bsolar
Apr 16, 2012, 12:53 PM
iPad displays are the usual lit up ones like all regular monitors, yes?

If so, it must suck to read books from. Perhaps they should make the display turn into e-ink when you want to read a book, if it doesn't do that already.

Many find a lot more straining to read from the iPad (or any LCD screen for that matter) than from an e-ink display. That's nothing new, and I would be very interested in some display technology able to offer the best of both worlds but as far as I know it won't happen in the near future.

coolspot18
Apr 16, 2012, 01:05 PM
HYou transmit the digital audio signal playing on the TV back to the iPad remote via wifi and use it as reference for your noise cancellation digital signal processing.


Lots of latency; if it's for background noise, there's no need to transmit as the ipad/ipod or whatever has a mic on it and it can pick it up in the first place.

firemedicmark
Apr 16, 2012, 01:25 PM
I really hope this is true. I'd really like a smaller ipad :)

fredf
Apr 16, 2012, 01:29 PM
Apple should simply lower the price of the iPad...the only reason to create an iPad "mini" is to offer a rendition of the iPad at a cheaper price than the iPad. .

That's exactly what is wrong. This 'mini' should not simply be a lower price point iPad. There are people who want a powerful and useful full fledged tablet with iOS but at 7" and not 10".

nuckinfutz
Apr 16, 2012, 01:34 PM
Or.. we can wait until next year when the iPad 2 is priced at $299

Not going to happen. There is a limit to how cheap something can get. Pricing is supply and demand and the older a product gets the less supply it's use of outdate parts offers.

Fandongo
Apr 16, 2012, 01:43 PM
Make it a DSLR monitor.
Make it a DSLR monitor.
Make it a DSLR monitor.
Make it a DSLR monitor.
Make it a DSLR monitor.
Make it a DSLR monitor.
Make it a DSLR monitor.
Make it a DSLR monitor.
Make it a DSLR monitor.
Make it a DSLR monitor.

Fools.

fertilized-egg
Apr 16, 2012, 01:48 PM
Wouldn't that be a little disrespectful to Steve Jobs?
He said he didn't like 7 inch tablets... (Didnt he? Or am I imagining it? :s)

That's exactly what is wrong. This 'mini' should not simply be a lower price point iPad. There are people who want a powerful and useful full fledged tablet with iOS but at 7" and not 10".

People, people, we're looking at a 7.85" iPad which is roughly equivalent to a 8.2" Android tablet in display surface, not a 7" one.

As proven over and over again, people don't consider the aspect ratio when they see the diagonal length. If an Android tablet was said to be 8.2", it'll feel different from a 7" tablet because it starts with the number 8. This is significantly bigger than a 7" Android tablet with nearly 40% boost in the screen real estate.

marksman
Apr 16, 2012, 01:59 PM
dont know about you, but personally i still dont see much point in a smaller ipad.

A mini iPad makes more sense then an iPhone with a 5" screen. Keep the iPhone at 3.5" and offer a smaller iPad insted.

----------

New iPad hardware wouldn't target people who want Windows 8 tablets: iOS 6 would.

I'm pretty sure if people are going to choose Windows 8 tablets, it's because they're running Windows 8, not because they have smaller screens.

Also, loving the fact they put the picture of the iPad at two different sizes. Ace photoshopping there. ;)
Um what? Windows sells no tablets at a larger size. Yes windows might sell tablets at a smaller size but not because of windows. Simply because an iOS option does not exist.

wolfpackfan
Apr 16, 2012, 02:05 PM
Dejavu ... Groundhog day ... Soap re-runs ... Why do the same Rumors keep popping up on MR?

Because there might be some truth to them?

iSee
Apr 16, 2012, 02:05 PM
Why do people keep saying that because the resolution would be the same as the iPad 1 it wouldn't cause fragmentation??

If you keep the same resolution and reduce the screen size, you get smaller buttons and targets, while your fingers don't get smaller.

Apple's HIG defines the minimum size of a button target based on the pixel densities of existing iOS devices, relative to the size of the average human finger.

If you take existing iPad apps and put them on a smaller screen, many button targets will fall below the minimum size.

That means that apps would have to be redesigned for this iPad mini, creating yet another transition period where developers will have to make an iPad mini version of their app.

It wouldn't be as bad as what's happening on Android, and many apps wouldn't need that much work to be optimized for the iPad mini, but it would still be fragmentation as developers will have to target yet another screen format when building their apps.

And unlike what Google would like you to believe, there's no way of "automagically" rearange interfaces depending on the screen size and resolution without sacrificing a great deal of UI design efficiency. Just look at all these ugly Android tablet apps that have a lot of wasted blank space.

Like I said, I'm skeptical and until try it myself, I'm inclined to think you're right.

But the argument goes something like this (sorry, I don't have the link, if you're interested, I think it was linked to on daringfireball.net someplace):

(NOTE: don't quote me on the specific numbers -- this is just to illustrate)
Apple HID for iOS specifies the minimum clickable area is 44x44 normal density pixels. On the original iPhone this was .27" x 27". On the current iPad it is somewhat bigger. On a 7.85" 1024x768 device, it would be .27" x .27", just like the iPhone. Therefore, iPad UI's should work well on a 1024x768 device.

To some degree I buy this: if you uniformly shrink a UI down, the user will adapt: this is a hand-held device, so the user will simply tend to hold the device closer and poke a little more precisely. (I guess this device would not be meant for the far-sighted nor those with poor dexterity.) But there are limits to how far that will work. My intuition says 9.7 --> 7.85 is too far.

wolfpackfan
Apr 16, 2012, 02:06 PM
i really hope this is true. I'd really like a smaller ipad :)

+1

fertilized-egg
Apr 16, 2012, 02:07 PM
A mini iPad makes more sense then an iPhone with a 5" screen. Keep the iPhone at 3.5" and offer a smaller iPad insted.

More importantly, you can use all the "real" tablet apps that are optimized for large screens instead of stretched out phone apps.

My question is the actual size of the device and how thin the bezel will be. A Kindle Fire is 7.5" x 4.7". The theoretical iPad Mini display is 6.28" 4.71" thus if the bezel can be kept minimum, they can have something that's very similar to Kindle Fire in size, theoretically speaking. There have been rumors that LG is aggressively moving toward supplying new type of displays for that very purpose for both iPad Mini and the upcoming iPhone, so it'll be very interesting to see.



To some degree I buy this: if you uniformly shrink a UI down, the user will adapt: this is a hand-held device, so the user will simply tend to hold the device closer and poke a little more precisely. (I guess this device would not be meant for the far-sighted nor those with poor dexterity.) But there are limits to how far that will work. My intuition says 9.7 --> 7.85 is too far.

I also think it might be stretching things a bit. It does make a lot of sense that they are going to 7.85" since then the UI elements will match exactly what iPhone had before Retina. However it seems there are already elements such as Safari buttons that are placed too close to each other. I'm not sure how well they'll work when they are shrunken down. It's just not the size of the buttons but how close those buttons are.

ckurt25
Apr 16, 2012, 02:10 PM
Or.. we can wait until next year when the iPad 2 is priced at $299

I'd rather have a 7.85" iPad for $299 than an iPad 2 for the same price. It's about size for me and I'm sure it would be for others. Also, the market may not be too receptive to buy a 2 year old product. They want the latest and greatest.

wolfpackfan
Apr 16, 2012, 02:11 PM
These will sell so easily it won't be funny. From a gaming perspective I bet this fits in the hand very nicely.

iOS devices are the hot ticket for Apple. They need to meet the needs (price point helps) of as many customers as possible. If they gap is too large they're loosing sales and market share in the gaps.


Exactly. Apple needs something to really make a big splash for this Christmas. Their last two big releases - iPhone 4S and new iPad seem so boring. I have an iPad 1 and had planned on getting the new iPad but took my 1 in to do a side by side comparison and just saw no reason to do the upgrade. Yes it has the much better resolution but how good a screen do you need? But if an iPad mini is released I will be at the head of the line to buy one.

Yebubbleman
Apr 16, 2012, 02:12 PM
This particular post has brought out some legitimately funny jokes. I like that.

In the meantime, I could only see this happening if the iPod touch were discontinued; it's not like it isn't already an iPad mini of sorts as it stands now anyway.

fertilized-egg
Apr 16, 2012, 02:14 PM
Their last two big releases - iPhone 4S and new iPad seem so boring. ... Yes it has the much better resolution but how good a screen do you need?


Funny thing is, I actually thought the Retina display on iPad was one of biggest improvement I've seen from any mobile device in recent years. The screen is friggin' amazing because iPad is actually big enough to replace real print publication and it greatly improves the text legibility.

nuckinfutz
Apr 16, 2012, 02:15 PM
Exactly. Apple needs something to really make a big splash for this Christmas. Their last two big releases - iPhone 4S and new iPad seem so boring. I have an iPad 1 and had planned on getting the new iPad but took my 1 in to do a side by side comparison and just saw no reason to do the upgrade. Yes it has the much better resolution but how good a screen do you need? But if an iPad mini is released I will be at the head of the line to buy one.

Actually the new iPad is a nice upgrade for those with a first generation iPad. I'm betting that the first gen iPad falls off the wagon in performance once iOS 6.0 hits this year.

You're going to need a dual core processor and faster graphics. Count on it.

ericrwalker
Apr 16, 2012, 02:21 PM
I'd rather have a 7.85" iPad for $299 than an iPad 2 for the same price. It's about size for me and I'm sure it would be for others. Also, the market may not be too receptive to buy a 2 year old product. They want the latest and greatest.

Same here, I've almost pulled the trigger on the iPad a couple of times but I think it's just a little too big. I've played with them a few times at the Apple Store and my friends have them. Just wish they were a little smaller.

fanspeed
Apr 16, 2012, 02:24 PM
Yea my last GF said it was about the size also maybe that's why she dumped me.

ericrwalker
Apr 16, 2012, 02:30 PM
Yea my last GF said it was about the size also maybe that's why she dumped me.


GF: "who are you going to please with that little thing"?

Me: "myself" :D

jouster
Apr 16, 2012, 02:40 PM
Make it a DSLR monitor.
Make it a DSLR monitor.
Make it a DSLR monitor.
Make it a DSLR monitor.
Make it a DSLR monitor.
Make it a DSLR monitor.
Make it a DSLR monitor.
Make it a DSLR monitor.
Make it a DSLR monitor.
Make it a DSLR monitor.

Fools.

Yes. Video capable too, please.

Cole Slaw
Apr 16, 2012, 02:43 PM
My eyesight isn't what it used to be so I'm hoping for at least a 12 inch iPhone and 21 inch iPad this time 'round.

ericrwalker
Apr 16, 2012, 02:44 PM
My eyesight isn't what it used to be so I'm hoping for at least a 12 inch iPhone and 21 inch iPad this time 'round.

Why stop there? We could go double that. :rolleyes:

GQB
Apr 16, 2012, 03:04 PM
Smaller? What a rubbish idea, could go a 12" iPad though.

Bigger? what a rubbish idea, could go a 7.85" iPad though.
(see how that works? What works for me may not work for you.)

----------

Wouldn't that be a little disrespectful to Steve Jobs?
He said he didn't like 7 inch tablets... (Didnt he? Or am I imagining it? :s)

This isn't 7".
But whatever the size, just how long are people going to insist that a head-fake by a no-longer-with-us executive is somehow a binding legal contract?

Drag'nGT
Apr 16, 2012, 03:18 PM
Exactly. Apple needs something to really make a big splash for this Christmas. Their last two big releases - iPhone 4S and new iPad seem so boring. I have an iPad 1 and had planned on getting the new iPad but took my 1 in to do a side by side comparison and just saw no reason to do the upgrade. Yes it has the much better resolution but how good a screen do you need? But if an iPad mini is released I will be at the head of the line to buy one.

I kept the iPad 1 up until the new one came out. The new iPad is way better than the 1st gen. The resolution makes reading and browsing so much better. Use the new one for 2 weeks and then go back to your iPad 1 and you will be like 'wow! This one is much slower and the text is nowhere near as sharp.'

ericinboston
Apr 16, 2012, 03:34 PM
That's exactly what is wrong. This 'mini' should not simply be a lower price point iPad. There are people who want a powerful and useful full fledged tablet with iOS but at 7" and not 10".

I disagree. Apple currently offers 4" and 10" iPads (I'm going back to my points that the iPod Touch and the iPhone are essentially smaller versions of the iPad).

Adding a 7.85" in the mix, at the pricepoints theorized, is just going to muddy the waters. Think about...as a consumer you're going to see a Touch, a Phone, and 2 iPads...3 of those 4 devices sit in the $249 - $299 range. Now you create/find a comparison chart of the features. Pretty much all the same features except for sizes and the ability to make a phone call. People are not necessarily going to buy the iPad Mini. The 4" models fit in your pocket. The 10" isn't that much larger than a 7.85" inch...neither are going to fit in your pocket and maybe not even a woman's purse.

Being slightly larger here and there (and I'm sure Apple will muck around with the features, too, so they can keep their hefty margins) isn't going to attract loads of people.

As I said, the iPods (and I believe iPhones) all dropped in price as they matured. Next is Gen 4 of iPad...I think the 10" is a great size FOR A TABLET...they would be much smarter to drop the price $50-$100 (or add a lower-low end for that discount) than create a whole new "line" of iPads supposedly aimed at size-conscious folks who can't bear to hold the extra 2" of space and still smaller than a standard 8.5"x11" sheet of paper.

The Kindle is not a tablet...it's definitely an e-book reader and the physical size completely warrants its definition. The Kindle Fire more of a tablet but still centered around e-books. The iPad is a flat-out tablet with almost 0 concentration....it does a lot of things quite well (thanks to years/generations of Touch and iPhone feedback).

But alas, maybe Apple will create 9 different versions of the iPad just like they do of the iPod.

Techwriter
Apr 16, 2012, 03:34 PM
We can currently purchase an iPhone or iPod Touch, or buy the larger iPad. If TV manufacturers had followed this path, we'd have a 15" and a 55" TV from which to choose.

While not for everyone, some people actually do prefer smaller, lighter devices over larger ones. Sometimes, they are even willing to pay nearly as much for them. I'm old enough to remember when a 13" TV was not much cheaper than a larger one, but people wanted them and still bought them.

If Apple can produce an iPad mini at a reasonable cost, it's going to be very popular, especially among Kindle and Nook Tablet owners.

A new iPad mini user is going to purchase a lot of Apps and content. It's hard to see how Apple could really lose. Why must it be a one-size-fits-all option?

FuFuFu
Apr 16, 2012, 03:57 PM
This rumor is so fake ... come on apple wouldn't do that. If Steve would turn around in his grave.

pinchez
Apr 16, 2012, 04:00 PM
The smaller iPad would be great for my Wife as she's been eyeing up 7" Android tabs that she can carry in her handbag. Her uses would be reading, gaming and surfing especially on holiday.

I have the new iPad and while she likes the quality and iOS it's just simply too big and heavy for her.

Think she would go for a 7" iPad over any droid or Windows 8 Tab but size and weight are her biggest concerns.

ericinboston
Apr 16, 2012, 04:02 PM
A new iPad mini user is going to purchase a lot of Apps and content. It's hard to see how Apple could really lose. Why must it be a one-size-fits-all option?

I believe (and thought I saw real stats on this a year ago) that a very few percentage of the population "buy" a lot of apps.

I have purchased about 8 apps total in my 4+ years of iOS devices. Ditto for a lot of my friends. I own a handful of free apps, too.

Of course there are folks out there that will purchase dozens of apps each year...most likely, in my opinion, this audience is the 10-20 year olds who buy a lot of fun/cheesy games. But I'm not trying to rate which apps are better.

Where Apple really grows is in the volume of users...each purchasing a few apps here and there (or more)...not a community of folks buying 20+ apps every year.

As far as buying content...I'm not sure what you are referring to...Apple has stumbled since Day 1 with the iPad regarding newspapers and magazines. Even Apples iBooks does poorly. Weren't we all supposed to be reading the newspaper and our favorite book and our magazine subscriptions on the iPad by now? :) Kindle owns the e-books market. Apple should own the magazines market. Newspapers, IMO, are still doomed and will never do well in the digital world (far too much competition from a variety of news outlets, ads that annoy people, paying all those employees, etc).

trunten
Apr 16, 2012, 04:14 PM
Apple is becoming a mass producing machine. This will be the downfall of Apple. No more qaulity but quanity.

Classic irony.

ckurt25
Apr 16, 2012, 04:17 PM
I disagree. Apple currently offers 4" and 10" iPads (I'm going back to my points that the iPod Touch and the iPhone are essentially smaller versions of the iPad).

Adding a 7.85" in the mix, at the pricepoints theorized, is just going to muddy the waters. Think about...as a consumer you're going to see a Touch, a Phone, and 2 iPads...3 of those 4 devices sit in the $249 - $299 range. Now you create/find a comparison chart of the features. Pretty much all the same features except for sizes and the ability to make a phone call. People are not necessarily going to buy the iPad Mini. The 4" models fit in your pocket. The 10" isn't that much larger than a 7.85" inch...neither are going to fit in your pocket and maybe not even a woman's purse.

Being slightly larger here and there (and I'm sure Apple will muck around with the features, too, so they can keep their hefty margins) isn't going to attract loads of people.

As I said, the iPods (and I believe iPhones) all dropped in price as they matured. Next is Gen 4 of iPad...I think the 10" is a great size FOR A TABLET...they would be much smarter to drop the price $50-$100 (or add a lower-low end for that discount) than create a whole new "line" of iPads supposedly aimed at size-conscious folks who can't bear to hold the extra 2" of space and still smaller than a standard 8.5"x11" sheet of paper.

The Kindle is not a tablet...it's definitely an e-book reader and the physical size completely warrants its definition. The Kindle Fire more of a tablet but still centered around e-books. The iPad is a flat-out tablet with almost 0 concentration....it does a lot of things quite well (thanks to years/generations of Touch and iPhone feedback).

But alas, maybe Apple will create 9 different versions of the iPad just like they do of the iPod.

Not a big deal but the iPhone is only 3.5" and the current iPad is only 9.7" People are calling for a 4" iPhone, I don't happen to be one of them. I a good size guy and have above average size hands and having a 4" or bigger device makes one handed operation difficult, if not impossible for people with smaller hands. Also, carrying a bigger device one's pants pocket becomes more difficult / uncomfortable.

Now the current iPads are great at what they do but the majority of people that use them, after the initial "look what I can do on it period" are using them for web surfing, movies, books, games, facebook... Stuff that can easily be done on an iPhone but they're choosing to do that on the iPad. In my case, I pick up the iPad (original) because of the larger screen and battery life vs using my iPhone. When I type something it's a pain in the butt and holding onto the iPad for an hour or more gets tiresome. Based on many of the posts here, there are plenty of people that would gladly pay $299 for a 7.85" device.

It's not fair to say that it's about the same price as an iPhone and that someone would buy one over the other. They might buy one OR the other but the main solution they provide is completely different. What's most obvious is the phone part. No one is going to use a 7.85" device as their every day phone. Don't forget that the $199 for an iPhone is a subsidized price and you're locked into a voice and data contract with it. So the cost of ownership over the course of two years for my iPhone is in the ballpark of $2500. $299 < $2,500.

A smaller iPad may eat sales of the iPod Touch and I could be wrong here but haven't sales slowed down there? Maybe because there hasn't been a hardware refresh in a while but whatever the reason, I don't believe there is as much of a market for the iPod Touch if there was a $299 7.85" iPad.

There are plenty of people out there that don't want to hold an extra 2" in their hand and you shouldn't just compare this only to the Fire. There are other 7" Android devices and it just happens to be one of the most successful non iOS tablets. It does a decent job with the web surfing, movie watching, book reading, game playing and facebooking that the majority of iPad owners would want to do.

Just because you don't see yourself using one doesn't mean others wouldn't want it. Look at the responses for yourself....

emjaymert
Apr 16, 2012, 04:25 PM
I have carpal tunnel .I find that the current ipad is exactly the "wrong" size and weight for me to use.I would LOVE a smaller,lighter one.

SBlue1
Apr 16, 2012, 04:37 PM
Hm. I dont See the point of this size. The iPad is just perfect as it is. Can't imagine typing on a smaller screen this fast.

nuckinfutz
Apr 16, 2012, 04:39 PM
Hm. I dont See the point of this size. The iPad is just perfect as it is. Can't imagine typing on a smaller screen this fast.

That's why vendors offer choices. They want to cover the the largest swath of users. You are fine with 9.7" while the poster before you wants a smaller iPad.

Says it all doesn't it?

tigress666
Apr 16, 2012, 04:42 PM
dont know about you, but personally i still dont see much point in a smaller ipad.

Here you go. I'll list my and my roommate's reasons.

Better as a book reader as it will be lighter/easier to hold.
Fits easier in places for on the go
My roommate is a pilot and the way his plane is laid out the iPad as is now is just plain too big to be of much use. He is waiting for a approximately 7" one to come out cause there is software he'd like to use with it and it will fit in the cockpit better.

julianbdavis
Apr 16, 2012, 04:44 PM
Not going to happen. Same reason we're not going to see a different size phone. Fragmentation. Surprised people still fall for these, but every year there it is.

SpectatorHere
Apr 16, 2012, 04:45 PM
Point 1: Apple is the biggest company in the world, not some niche boutique turning out a of couple products. Apple's biggest future growth market is iTunes/AppStore/iBook...and this has been clear for quite some time. The reason for this is because they don't have to create content, yet they continue to get a big chunk of profits from digital sales.

I think Apple would GIVE away iPhones and iPads if people weren't willing to buy them, just to get the profits from digital content sales.

Point 2: Amazon is selling a good number of crappy Kindles, and more importantly, getting people to use their ecosystem. Why allow this when you have 100 billion cash on hand? Why not just take a loss on the hardware and undercut Amazon? (Answer: They will, but no need to immediately as it will upset their entire product pricing schemes.)

Point 3: Another major emerging market is China, and a cheaper iPad would be great there (note the advantage of having cellular capabilities). 7.85" is better for commuters, smaller hands, etc.

Point 4: Nintendo and Sony don't know what hit them, and Microsoft has the living room. 7.85" is a great gaming console...again, for kids, they'll want it cellular.

Conclusion: Yes, I think if I can see how dumb they'd be for not doing it, you can safely assume the iPad mini is coming.

Navdakilla
Apr 16, 2012, 04:52 PM
"hey love, I finally got you an iPad too"

A great present for us men who don't want to have to splash out for a full iPad.

Exactly haha, I been wanting to get my girl a iPad. Can't afford it tho, got her various other "cheaper" tabs, android and the play book and both are terrible. If this came out I would get her it for sure

I also know a lot of people that love the iPad but can't afford it. Im sure they would get this if it actually does come out

Nickerbocker
Apr 16, 2012, 04:55 PM
My interest in a ~7" iPad is only because it will no doubt be lighter. I would much prefer the current ~10" iPad but shave off about 0.5 lbs and get rid of the ridiculously sharp edges.

I was really sad to see that the new iPad was actually heavier than the iPad 2. The increased resolution, battery, and overall specs still make it the better device. People say it was "only a slight increase in weight", but I don't consider 8% to be a slight increase. I don't consider the 8% sales tax to be a "slight tax".

SpectatorHere
Apr 16, 2012, 05:02 PM
My interest in a ~7" iPad is only because it will no doubt be lighter. I would much prefer the current ~10" iPad but shave off about 0.5 lbs and get rid of the ridiculously sharp edges.

I was really sad to see that the new iPad was actually heavier than the iPad 2. The increased resolution, battery, and overall specs still make it the better device. People say it was "only a slight increase in weight", but I don't consider 8% to be a slight increase. I don't consider the 8% sales tax to be a "slight tax".


4G modems are power hogs (probably the retina screen as well, considering the increased pixels light has to pass through). ...And Apple didn't want to put out a product that had less battery life than its predecessor. Give it one more year and it will lighter.

nuckinfutz
Apr 16, 2012, 05:07 PM
Not going to happen. Same reason we're not going to see a different size phone. Fragmentation. Surprised people still fall for these, but every year there it is.

Fragmentation means many different things. Please explain your usage of it within this context of iPads please.

knucklehead
Apr 16, 2012, 06:01 PM
makes a 7.85 iPad with little to no bezel, like this:

http://i1075.photobucket.com/albums/w426/Dave1538/IMG_1978.jpg

(That's 7.85 screen image on Kindle Touch)

You could do this:

http://i1075.photobucket.com/albums/w426/Dave1538/IMG_1980.jpg

(That's a Kindle Touch in back pocket)

You would get an iPad that's much easier to have with you, and not really have that much of a smaller screen.
You can easily make the 7.85 screen visually identical to the larger on with the amazing power of your hand:

http://i1075.photobucket.com/albums/w426/Dave1538/IMG_1979.jpg

Just by moving the smaller screen closer to your face, you see them as the same.

How much closer you ask?
At arms length, about 3 and a half inches --- less than that as you get closer. Really, not all that much.

Try it for yourself and see.

deftdrummer
Apr 16, 2012, 06:09 PM
It's starting to look less and less like a rumor! Personally I think that a smaller iPad would be brilliant, so I can stop hearing crap from the guy at work about how "this worked for me" re: his Kindle fire and how it's so small and great for reading.

I read a lot too on my iPad, but the content offering is vastly superior. (Shhh, he doesn't know.)

Joking aside, I can see a large quantity of current iPad owners "downgrading" who find they only use the thing for web while sitting on the couch in the evenings.

I myself might benefit from selling the current iPad and getting a smaller one based on monetary gain and the amount of use my current iPad 2 gets.

If this thing ends up having a retina display and price around $250, consider me a downgraded man.

Ubele
Apr 16, 2012, 06:10 PM
I don't understand the reaction, "Such a product wouldn't be useful to me, therefore it wouldn't be useful to anyone else (and anyone who did buy it would be a fool), therefore Apple isn't going to make it, and therefore the rumor has to be false." Even more incomprehensible is the reaction, "I don't want such a product, so please, Apple, don't make it for anyone else to buy, either!"

The iPad Mini rumor makes total sense to me. Is such a product technically feasible to make? Yes. Does it conflict with existing technical standards (i.e., "The iPad Mini is rumored to have a 1:1 aspect ratio and a 97 dpi resolution to keep down costs.")? No. Does it fill a void in Apple's product line? Yes, for those who want something sized like a Kindle. Forgetting about size preference, is there anything that would compel people to buy something with less capability than the iPad? Yes, a lower price. Is there a market for it? We won't know until or unless it's released, but I'm willing to bet yes, for the many reasons that others have stated. Can Apple sell it at the rumored lower price point and still make a profit? That's the only thing I question. Would it cut into iPod Touch sales? Maybe, but if someone decides to spend $250-300 on an iPad Mini rather than $200 on an iPod Touch, isn't that better for Apple, assuming profit margins are similar?

Going by the logic of some of the posters, why would Apple ever have come up with the MacBook Air, when the 15" MacBook Pro is so more capable? There's no market for such a thing, I need the full power of the MBP to do what I do, so everyone else, must, too. Anyone who thinks they need something lighter than the MBP is a wuss and needs to work out at a gym. An 11" display is too small to do anything useful. If you can't afford a MBP, then save up some money until you can, rather than speding money on a piece of crap meant to cash in on the Windows netbook market. Well, hypothetically speaking, because Apple would never release something like a netbook. Steve Jobs said so.

thebignewt
Apr 16, 2012, 06:17 PM
That is not gonna happen. First off that's not enough money for Apple to shoot for. Second, they're about as worried about the "new Windows tablet" as they are about the freaking Blackberry Playbook. Let 'em have the small change if that's what they want. Kindle want to lose money on the Fire, go for it, lose all you want dude. Seriously.
The post above presumes there's big market for the 7", ie some people won't buy a 10" tablet. Um, looks like about 70% of tablet owners proved you wrong. Just because Kindle is selling 7" and has to give them away to get rid of them doesn't mean Apple will. They'll need to get about $300 per to make their 30% profit too. The Kindle is a POS machine selling only on price and apps, not techs. Not gonna happen dudes.
The Macbook Air was a way different maching than the Macbook, it started the "thin to win" line that others are now copying with TV ads. (The Zenmaster!). And it was expensive, don't forget that.

fertilized-egg
Apr 16, 2012, 06:20 PM
If this thing ends up having a retina display and price around $250, consider me a downgraded man.

It most likely won't have a Retina display as that'll be the major differentiator for the larger iPad. I'm wondering what Apple will do in order to meet the $250-$299 price range. Only 8G of Flash memory like Kindle Fire? Single core A5? If they can sell it $249 with the smallest bezel size possible, I would be fine with those limitations.

brewcitywi
Apr 16, 2012, 06:27 PM
I still see it as a necessary position in the marketplace with competition trying to outdo Apple's $499 price on some level. A smaller iPad might not be something Steve Jobs wanted, but it could still serve a great part of the market that can't afford $499.

With a possible 3Q launch, i'm STILL going back to my earlier possible prediction:

ePad for Education

tigress666
Apr 16, 2012, 06:28 PM
I don't understand the reaction, "Such a product wouldn't be useful to me, therefore it wouldn't be useful to anyone else (and anyone who did buy it would be a fool), therefore Apple isn't going to make it, and therefore the rumor has to be false." Even more incomprehensible is the reaction, "I don't want such a product, so please, Apple, don't make it for anyone else to buy, either!"


Well, see, I can explain it for the people who don't want a bigger screen iPhone cause that could mean their smaller screen iPhone won't get as good specs, get treated with the economy version treatment or just not made at all. So I could understand why they might feel threatened by apple making a larger iphone (course that's why I feel a little leery of the idea of Apple making two difference size phones).

But as for the iPad, them making a smaller iPad also (I really doubt they'd replace the iPad with the smaller one) is not going to threaten to make the iPad of their choice have lesser tech (if anything the smaller one will be given the lesser tech and be treated as the cheap version). So I on that one I fail to see why people who don't want a smaller one care.

Rogifan
Apr 16, 2012, 06:29 PM
I don't understand the reaction, "Such a product wouldn't be useful to me, therefore it wouldn't be useful to anyone else (and anyone who did buy it would be a fool), therefore Apple isn't going to make it, and therefore the rumor has to be false." Even more incomprehensible is the reaction, "I don't want such a product, so please, Apple, don't make it for anyone else to buy, either!"
no different than those that think Apple should make something just because it would be useful to them. Just because someone wants a device they can shove in their pants pocket doesn't mean Apple should produce such product. How many people shove 7"+ devices in their pants pockets anyway?

hleewell
Apr 16, 2012, 06:32 PM
What I am looking for at long freakin' last !!!
Definitely on my shopping list!

nuckinfutz
Apr 16, 2012, 06:32 PM
It most likely won't have a Retina display as that'll be the major differentiator for the larger iPad. I'm wondering what Apple will do in order to meet the $250-$299 price range. Only 8G of Flash memory like Kindle Fire? Single core A5? If they can sell it $249 with the smallest bezel size possible, I would be fine with those limitations.

They will leverage Anobit technology to deliver 16GB of stable NAND storage. The rest will be taking advantage of higher integrated parts.

GregA
Apr 16, 2012, 06:57 PM
I don't see how this is feasible. Unless this thing has little to no onboard storage, how could they ever sell it for or less than $299? The iPod Touch sells for $199 and this thing is twice as large! Apple also loves their margins so I fail to see how this keeps up with their strategy of profit maximization.

I don't know, I can see a 16GB iPod touch at $199, the iPad mini at $299, and the iPad 2 at $399.

Plus now that the iPad, iPod and iPhone are all retina, this thing will look like the forgotten middle child.

I think If they improve the iPod touch by making it a 4 inch regular screen with 16GB, and they make the iPad Mini with a smaller margin so it appears much smaller, this could really fit in to the product line.

Oh, and remember that the iPad 2 is not retina.

nuckinfutz
Apr 16, 2012, 07:02 PM
smaller devices take significantly more engineering chops. Case in point.


iPhone 4s 16GB = $649
New iPad 16GB LTE = $629

MattInOz
Apr 16, 2012, 08:27 PM
Why do people keep saying that because the resolution would be the same as the iPad 1 it wouldn't cause fragmentation??

If you keep the same resolution and reduce the screen size, you get smaller buttons and targets, while your fingers don't get smaller.

Apple's HIG defines the minimum size of a button target based on the pixel densities of existing iOS devices, relative to the size of the average human finger.

If you take existing iPad apps and put them on a smaller screen, many button targets will fall below the minimum size.

That means that apps would have to be redesigned for this iPad mini, creating yet another transition period where developers will have to make an iPad mini version of their app.

It wouldn't be as bad as what's happening on Android, and many apps wouldn't need that much work to be optimized for the iPad mini, but it would still be fragmentation as developers will have to target yet another screen format when building their apps.

And unlike what Google would like you to believe, there's no way of "automagically" rearange interfaces depending on the screen size and resolution without sacrificing a great deal of UI design efficiency. Just look at all these ugly Android tablet apps that have a lot of wasted blank space.

Yes but the minimum size for iPad is no smaller than the iPhone even though the screen density is lower making the same control much bigger on the current iPad. So an iPad at the same density as the iPhone would have the same size controls as the iPhone. The smaller iPad would be as usable as an iPhone in terms of finger size. If a button falls below size then it was smaller than the HIG recommendation already.

Yes there is no way to "automagically" rework layouts based on screen size Yet. Except on OS X they introduced Autolayout in Lion, which is exactly that, a massive upgrade to the layout system. If Apple move that to iOS then a single layout could work across a vast range of screen sizes. Views could even handle rotation from landscape to portrait without needing two layouts. Well unless you felt like you wanted to tweak the layout more specifically to suit each.

Don't think we'll see new screen sizes till Autolayout comes to iOS, but I think it'll happen very quickly afterwards, as a Carrot/Stick to get developers to adopt the new system.

charlituna
Apr 16, 2012, 10:10 PM
No disrespect, but the dead tell no tales.

Apple is a market leader and has control over the supply chain.

This is why I hesitant to believe the rumors. They all cite some need to compete with the Kindle Fire, the Note etc. But the current iPad is doing just fine at keeping the share down for those devices. So would Apple really feel this need to compete. I'm thinking not.

I still think that if Apple is doing anything around that size it won't be an iPad but rather a redo on the iPod touch. That it wasn't updated this past year is an oddity and perhaps that's for a reason. Perhaps they have a big change up in the works and it wasn't ready to go last fall. Or maybe they wanted to use the better displays but wanted to debut that with the new iPad rather than an iPod touch. etc

Mirai 11
Apr 16, 2012, 10:12 PM
I can't see the point in this at all.
I don't see any benefits or justifications in an 'iPad Mini'.
Plus, it's been debunked time and time again on the investor Q&A on the quarterly earnings calls, and Jobs himself, why are people still talking about this?
:confused:

charlituna
Apr 16, 2012, 10:48 PM
If Apple came out with a smaller iPad in that $250-300 price range, I would buy it. The current iPads are way too expensive for what I consider a toy that people WANT, but nobody NEEDS.

I have to disagree with the toy comment. Perhaps for you it is but for some of us it is actually a valuable work tool that is way easier to use compared to a laptop computer.

Holding a 17 inch laptop in my hands while trying to show a pre vis video to a dozen stunt men was basically impossible. Loading the same video on a dozen iPads, handing one to each of them to have a clear view and even take back to hair and makeup to review a few more times. Much better method and they actually feel safer because they feel like they really see what's about to happen. sometimes one inch can prevent an injury so for us, it's a need not a want.

----------


I thought apple was always the one that didn't care about what the market says, but was the one that always created products for perfection..


yes and no. THey don't just do as the market says because it says it. But if they see a value in something they will follow it.

ixodes
Apr 16, 2012, 11:07 PM
I knew it was only a matter of time before Apple caved in and built an iPad in this very useful size. Even more hilarious are the boys who are addicted to the word "fragmentation" just because of their underlying fear of Android.

Neither Android, nor a few sizes of iPads comprise fragmention. What it does represent is choices. Something Jobs had brainwashed his minions into believing is bad.

You don't see Tim Cook harbor the fears & insecurities Jobs did. What a very refreshing change. Cook is the consummate CEO, and Apple wins big because of it.

fertilized-egg
Apr 16, 2012, 11:16 PM
I knew it was only a matter of time before Apple caved in and built an iPad in this very useful size.

Except that the hypothetical iPad Mini isn't "this very useful size" by which you're probably refering to the 7" Android tablets.

You don't see Tim Cook harbor the fears & insecurities Jobs did. What a very refreshing change. Cook is the consummate CEO, and Apple wins big because of it.

Actually the rumor of a smaller iPad began to leak out of Korea back when Jobs was still alive, saying Apple inquired the potential supply of 7.85" display from LG, which was more substantial than the usual Digitimes rumors.

Plus Jobs never dissed a 8.2" Android tablet ;) The smaller iPad will be about 40% larger than the 7" Android, in other words the size of a 8.2" Android tablet.

Vtwo
Apr 16, 2012, 11:25 PM
I think people are going overboard with the whole Jobs thing. Steve Jobs said a lot of things for marketing and also to keep the competition in the dark.

He said Apple wouldn't make a video iPod because the screen was too small.

He said Apple wouldn't make a sub $500 netbook (hello iPad, not a netbook but basically a netbook replacement/alternative)

When he made the comment about the 7" display model, he wanted to market the 10" as the best size (and he was right when you look at the numbers). Does that mean there is no demand for 7", of course not and Steve knew that. However, since Apple decided to focus on the 10" first, it wouldn't make sense for him to acknowledge that there was demand for 7" but that Apple wouldn't be making one. It would give their competitors an edge.

If am sure if Steve was still here when the smaller model is released (whether this year or late), he would say that he heard customers' demand for a smaller iPad and after working on it for many many hours, they found a 'magic' solution which made the 7" size 'work'.

fertilized-egg
Apr 17, 2012, 12:02 AM
If am sure if Steve was still here when the smaller model is released (whether this year or late), he would say that he heard customers' demand for a smaller iPad and after working on it for many many hours, they found a 'magic' solution which made the 7" size 'work'.

My guess is that he'd diss 7" even more and claim 7.85" is the best. :D Seriously, the 7.85" iPad is a significant size jump from a 7" Android tablet - it's about 40% larger. I don't know why people keep thinking it's just like a 7" Android tablet.

techvervela
Apr 17, 2012, 01:20 AM
The smaller form factor would spell doom for the Nook/kindle niche, no?

btw: just got the new iPad. It is awesome for photographers who want to see how their great photos REALLY look! Here are some of my initial impressions.

http://www.techvervela.com/2012/04/ipad-3-first-impressions-retina-display.html

Lancelot9201
Apr 17, 2012, 03:42 AM
As with their other models I'm not a buyer until I can access files without using iTunes, connect an hdmi cable without the use of a dongle & be able to use a MiniSD card to store & retrieve files / tv shows / movies. Honestly I don't know how so many people have really make full use of an iPad without these features built-in.

karlwig
Apr 17, 2012, 03:57 AM
Honestly, I wouldn't mind a 12" iPad Pro with quad-core processor, 2GB ram, 128GB of storage, 802.11ac WIFI, and pressure sensitivity for creating artwork. But will it happen? I can dream.

I'm going to give my idea to DigiTimes and tell them I'm an analyst. Expect a post in about 45 minutes.

You know, I always thought Apple would get rid of some bezel at one point and squeeze a bigger 12" display into the same form factor.

Now it's the 3rd gen and I'm not so sure anymore. But I still think the idea of offering a bigger screen iPad, a "pro" if you like, is good -- certainly better to go this way than a smaller screen, when it won't fit into the pocket anyway.

ixodes
Apr 17, 2012, 04:44 AM
Except that the hypothetical iPad Mini isn't "this very useful size" by which you're probably refering to the 7" Android tablets.

I find it rather revealing that many here cannot have a discussion without bringing Androids into the dialog. Especially those who assume.

I was, and am referring to the physical size of an iPad.

As you may know these are Apple devices which are not to be confused with Android.

As one who travels for business, prefers to pack a carry-on bag containing both my MBA and an iPad smaller than the current model, I welcome any size between 7" & 8".

Apple has a rich history of success with MBP's & MacBooks in multiple sizes. Therefore it only makes sense that two sizes of iPads is certainly not unreasonable.

It's as simple as that.

Jibbajabba
Apr 17, 2012, 05:15 AM
Because there might be some truth to them?

Adding the same rumor multiple times doesn't make true any quicker ..

Rogifan
Apr 17, 2012, 06:27 AM
I knew it was only a matter of time before Apple caved in and built an iPad in this very useful size. Even more hilarious are the boys who are addicted to the word "fragmentation" just because of their underlying fear of Android.

Neither Android, nor a few sizes of iPads comprise fragmention. What it does represent is choices. Something Jobs had brainwashed his minions into believing is bad.

You don't see Tim Cook harbor the fears & insecurities Jobs did. What a very refreshing change. Cook is the consummate CEO, and Apple wins big because of it.
At this point all we have a rumors. Hearing the same rumor over and over doesn't make it fact. You say it's a very useful size. I disagree. Maybe if it was a different aspect ratio it would work but to take the current iPad and shrink it 30% doesn't make much sense to me. And it obviously didn't make sense to Steve or Jony either. But I guess that just makes me one of Steve's brainwashed minions. :rolleyes:

----------

I can't see the point in this at all.
I don't see any benefits or justifications in an 'iPad Mini'.
Plus, it's been debunked time and time again on the investor Q&A on the quarterly earnings calls, and Jobs himself, why are people still talking about this?
:confused:

Of course a smaller iPad makes sense. Your just one of Steve's brainwashed minions. ;) /s

ckurt25
Apr 17, 2012, 06:45 AM
It was Henry Ford that said you can have any color car you want, as long as it's black.

Just because Steve said no 7" iPad a couple of years ago it doesn't mean we won't see one soon.

I'll pre-order one for sure if they are released.

the8thark
Apr 17, 2012, 06:54 AM
It will be a sad day if Apple does this anytime soon. I just hope for everyone's sake Apple is not planing to do this.

jackc
Apr 17, 2012, 06:57 AM
It will be a sad day if Apple does this anytime soon. I just hope for everyone's sake Apple is not planing to do this.

Don't kill yourself, it'll be OK

ericrwalker
Apr 17, 2012, 06:58 AM
It will be a sad day if Apple does this anytime soon. I just hope for everyone's sake Apple is not planing to do this.

Why would it be a sad day? If you like the current size iPad then just buy that one. I don't carry a huge purse around all the time and would like a smaller iPad. If it's the price point, I think $249 to $299 seems cheap, I would be surprised if they are off bye $100.

A slightly smaller iPad is what a lot of people have been waiting for, including myself.

SactoGuy18
Apr 17, 2012, 07:03 AM
I think Apple is prototyping such a device and it will be available in 16 and 32 GB versions at 1024x768 resolution, but with a smaller size display it could achieve something close to "Retina Display" quality. And it could be a candidate for Sharp's IGZO technology display panel, too.

Arran
Apr 17, 2012, 07:11 AM
It will be a sad day if Apple does this anytime soon. I just hope for everyone's sake Apple is not planing to do this.

Sad for who? The early rumors of a smaller iPad is partly why I returned my iPad 3 and went back to my trusty old iPad 1. The 3 was really nice, but not sufficiently differentiated from the 1 (for me, at least).

And while the retina display of the 3 is truly awesome, I'm more concerned with what I read, rather than how it looks - so the 1's lesser display is fine for now (as it has been these last two years).

tgc
Apr 17, 2012, 08:10 AM
If they spec it properly, it might not cannibalize their 10inch sales much at all. For example, it could come with just 8 gigs of memory.

If they DO come out with it (they should), they should in no way cripple it by memory.

It just rounds out the line of portable touch pads with usage (in the order of precedence.


iPod Touch - Gaming / Music
iPad Mini - Reading / Gaming / Music
iPad - Productivity / Reading / Gaming / Music


I might be a bit off as this is subjective, but the only time I use my iPad on the train to work is if I get a seat and can prop it up on my lap. A smaller iPad might even be more practical standing up on a packed train.

I think it would be good, but would think the it would be a bit more work for developers having to produce a few different resolutions of graphics, etc, etc,...

apolloa
Apr 17, 2012, 08:22 AM
I'll believe it when I see it still, but it would be cool for them to launch a 7" tab, I got a China Ainol 7" tab and it's a fantastic size! And if you had that with Apples iOS and Retina screen then it would be a damn nice product, especially if they sell it for a nice price too :) Say $300?

the8thark
Apr 17, 2012, 08:56 AM
Don't kill yourself, it'll be OK
I will live. But it will still be a sad day.


Why would it be a sad day? If you like the current size iPad then just buy that one. I don't carry a huge purse around all the time and would like a smaller iPad. If it's the price point, I think $249 to $299 seems cheap, I would be surprised if they are off bye $100.

A slightly smaller iPad is what a lot of people have been waiting for, including myself.
If you want a smaller tablet go and buy one today. There are a lot on the market. And some people are waiting for a smaller iPad. But not enough I guess are willing to give up iOS for the smaller tablets on offer now. Sales of the smaller tablets are not that good for a reason.

Sure a few people will cry if there is no smaller iPad. But the rest of us will just smile knowing Apple made the right decision (of no smaller iPad) or just not care at all.


Sad for who? The early rumors of a smaller iPad is partly why I returned my iPad 3 and went back to my trusty old iPad 1. The 3 was really nice, but not sufficiently differentiated from the 1 (for me, at least).

And while the retina display of the 3 is truly awesome, I'm more concerned with what I read, rather than how it looks - so the 1's lesser display is fine for now (as it has been these last two years).
1. Sad for shareholders who see Apple fragmenting their iPad product line into a size of tablet that has proven not to sell well.
2. Sad for developers who have to design Apps for another size of screen. And yes a direct ratio of screen is easy to develop for. But it's the UI that a smaller screen size can't replicate.
3. Sad for Steve Jobs. Wherever he is now he'd know this would be a bad idea. I know he said don't ever think what Jobs would do. But he had faith that Cook and Co would do the right thing. And this would be a kick in the groin to the faith Jobs had in Cook and Co.
4. Product cannibalisation. People might skip a standard iPad for a smaller one. That's less profits for Apple and the customer gets a worse product. Too big for a phone, too small for a decent tablet.

Etc etc.

mantan
Apr 17, 2012, 08:57 AM
If they DO come out with it (they should), they should in no way cripple it by memory.

It just rounds out the line of portable touch pads with usage (in the order of precedence.


iPod Touch - Gaming / Music
iPad Mini - Reading / Gaming / Music
iPad - Productivity / Reading / Gaming / Music


I might be a bit off as this is subjective, but the only time I use my iPad on the train to work is if I get a seat and can prop it up on my lap. A smaller iPad might even be more practical standing up on a packed train.

I think it would be good, but would think the it would be a bit more work for developers having to produce a few different resolutions of graphics, etc, etc,...

If the price point is $249 I think 8 gig would be where they land - similar to the entry level iPod Touch, free with contract 3GS and $99 iPhone 4. I couldn't see them offering a device with a bigger screen and twice the memory for $50 more. It would kill the Touch.

I guess it depends on how they feel devices will be used. Do they think it'll be a supplementary consumption device that people will use on commutes, trips, etc? Or do they think it'll be a primary device? If I'm looking for a device to supplement my iPhone am I going to want to put all my music/apps/video on it? Or am I comfortable just downloading some content before leaving on a business trip.

The key advantage to the iPod Touch is memory. If they don't want the iPad mini to canibalize that line, they would probably play out that advantage.

8GB iPad mini/wifi - $249
8GB iPad mini/3G - $299

8GB iPod Touch - discontinued
16GB iPod Touch - $199
32GB iPod Touch - $299
64 GB iPod Touch $399

thewitt
Apr 17, 2012, 09:01 AM
Highly unlikely they will enter this market space. The product would not be 2/3 the price of an iPad - it would likely have to come in at $399 to be viable.

Not going to happen

mantan
Apr 17, 2012, 09:04 AM
I will live. But it will still be a sad day.



If you want a smaller tablet go and buy one today. There are a lot on the market. And some people are waiting for a smaller iPad. But not enough I guess are willing to give up iOS for the smaller tablets on offer now. Sales of the smaller tablets are not that good for a reason.

Sure a few people will cry if there is no smaller iPad. But the rest of us will just smile knowing Apple made the right decision (of no smaller iPad) or just not care at all.



1. Sad for shareholders who see Apple fragmenting their iPad product line into a size of tablet that has proven not to sell well.
2. Sad for developers who have to design Apps for another size of screen. And yes a direct ratio of screen is easy to develop for. But it's the UI that a smaller screen size can't replicate.
3. Sad for Steve Jobs. Wherever he is now he'd know this would be a bad idea. I know he said don't ever think what Jobs would do. But he had faith that Cook and Co would do the right thing. And this would be a kick in the groin to the faith Jobs had in Cook and Co.
4. Product cannibalisation. People might skip a standard iPad for a smaller one. That's less profits for Apple and the customer gets a worse product. Too big for a phone, too small for a decent tablet.

Etc etc.

Kind of a myopic view.

I see it in a glass half full way.

1. It potentially puts more Apple products in people's hands. Families that can't justify spending $500-$850 on a second iPad for the spouse, kids, etc - may be more willing to spend $250-$300.

2. It gives people an option for a smaller device. My wife would LOVE a tablet she could put in her purse all the time. Just because it doesn't work you, doesn't mean there are other customers who'd really like it. I have no need for a MacBook pro. But that doesn't mean Apple shouldn't make it.

3. There have been many posts in this thread about how Steve Jobs changed his mind on products/ideas over the years. Apple continues to be about innovation. None of us know if Jobs would have changed his mind on the 7 inch tablet like he did on so many other things. Cook's responsbility is to do what he feels is best to do in the current market...not be a slave to comments Jobs made in the past.

Arran
Apr 17, 2012, 09:22 AM
At $250, I'd love it if this turned out to be a big-screen/extended battery "shell" for the new iphone 5/ipod touch:

You pop the phone into the "shell" for big-screen use at home/office/plane/etc.
You take the phone out when you're on the go.
One data plan.
Only one device to sync.
If you want the max capacity (64GB?) then you only have to pay for it once.
Just one, good, rear-facing camera (the phone's).
All your sensitive personal info in one small, easily-protected device (the phone).
No more griping about the bloat of universal apps: This thing would be built for universal apps.
Shareable hardware (but what's the bet people would wind-up wanting their own?)
Low cost entry to the iPad experience (once you have a new phone - which typically go in 2-year replacement cycles anyway).
Satisfies those wanting a bigger-screen iPhone :)


Something like this ASUS padfone (but with Apple design):

Moonjumper
Apr 17, 2012, 09:54 AM
I will live. But it will still be a sad day.



If you want a smaller tablet go and buy one today. There are a lot on the market. And some people are waiting for a smaller iPad. But not enough I guess are willing to give up iOS for the smaller tablets on offer now. Sales of the smaller tablets are not that good for a reason.

Sure a few people will cry if there is no smaller iPad. But the rest of us will just smile knowing Apple made the right decision (of no smaller iPad) or just not care at all.



1. Sad for shareholders who see Apple fragmenting their iPad product line into a size of tablet that has proven not to sell well.
2. Sad for developers who have to design Apps for another size of screen. And yes a direct ratio of screen is easy to develop for. But it's the UI that a smaller screen size can't replicate.
3. Sad for Steve Jobs. Wherever he is now he'd know this would be a bad idea. I know he said don't ever think what Jobs would do. But he had faith that Cook and Co would do the right thing. And this would be a kick in the groin to the faith Jobs had in Cook and Co.
4. Product cannibalisation. People might skip a standard iPad for a smaller one. That's less profits for Apple and the customer gets a worse product. Too big for a phone, too small for a decent tablet.

Etc etc.

I've highlighted the points I think are easiest to not agree with.

On the first point, as you say, smaller tablets are not selling because they don't have iOS even though people would like that size. This is a good reason for Apple to make a smaller tablet, but you are saying the opposite.

The second point is very easy to dispute. Tablets were proven not to sell well until the iPad came along.

east85
Apr 17, 2012, 09:59 AM
I just wanted to say that if this happens, I will be buying one. I have put off buying an iPad but at the right price point, I can make it happen. I don't have much of a use for an iPad at the moment, but the uses that are there would probably justify a much lower price point. This is probably a good strategy by Apple considering there is obviously a huge segment of the population looking for smaller form factors.

Ubele
Apr 17, 2012, 10:57 AM
Well, see, I can explain it for the people who don't want a bigger screen iPhone cause that could mean their smaller screen iPhone won't get as good specs, get treated with the economy version treatment or just not made at all. So I could understand why they might feel threatened by apple making a larger iphone (course that's why I feel a little leery of the idea of Apple making two difference size phones).

But as for the iPad, them making a smaller iPad also (I really doubt they'd replace the iPad with the smaller one) is not going to threaten to make the iPad of their choice have lesser tech (if anything the smaller one will be given the lesser tech and be treated as the cheap version). So I on that one I fail to see why people who don't want a smaller one care.

Ah, that makes sense -- like with the pro community that feels Apple is abandoning them in favor of the more-lucrative consumer market.

I agree that an iPad Mini wouldn't threaten the iPad. People who want an iPad for its feature set, and who can afford it, will buy one. Some people who want an iPad but can't afford it would buy an iPad Mini instead. Then there would be some people who prefer the small form factor and would buy a Mini. Finally, I'm sure that some people people who own an iPad would buy a Mini for their kids or whatever.

Ubele
Apr 17, 2012, 11:28 AM
no different than those that think Apple should make something just because it would be useful to them. Just because someone wants a device they can shove in their pants pocket doesn't mean Apple should produce such product. How many people shove 7"+ devices in their pants pockets anyway?

It is a little different. Apple makes products that it thinks will be popular enough to make huge profits for Apple. Those products have to adhere to Apple's design philosophy, which is part of their value proposition. Every time a new Apple product is rumored, this forum is inundated with people who say that such a product would just be an overpriced version of whatever crappy alternative currently exists, so therefore Apple shouldn't make it. The MacBook Air is just one example: "Why should Apple make their own version of an underpowered Windows netbook? It's won't be any better, but of course it will cost twice as much." If Apple believes that enough people would buy an iPad Mini, if they think the user experience would be acceptable, and if they can make a profit, then there's no reason not to make a Mini.

Tigress666 makes a good point that some people fear a new product they don't want would divert Apple's attention from a current product they do want. I don't think that would happen with an iPad Mini, though. I probably wouldn't buy one, as I love the iPad, but it wouldn't adversely affect me if they make a Mini. It would be good news for people who do want one. As for the converse of people wanting Apple to make a product they don't currently make, that's one way Apple finds out if there might be enough demand for something. I wish that Apple would make a low-priced tower, like my beloved 2000 Power Mac G4, which I kept for eight years, upgrading every component that I could. If there were enough demand, Apple probably would make one. I accept that there isn't enough demand, though, and I'm not one of those people who say "Apple sucks" because they don't make everything I want.

Tumbleweed666
Apr 17, 2012, 12:18 PM
dont know about you, but personally i still dont see much point in a smaller ipad.

The millions of folks who bought Kindle Fires would beg to differ with you.

mrgreen4242
Apr 17, 2012, 12:58 PM
It most likely won't have a Retina display as that'll be the major differentiator for the larger iPad. I'm wondering what Apple will do in order to meet the $250-$299 price range. Only 8G of Flash memory like Kindle Fire? Single core A5? If they can sell it $249 with the smallest bezel size possible, I would be fine with those limitations.

I hope it would be one of these or the other (single core A5 or 8gb of storage), if it's $249. On the other hand, if they go $299 they could pretty easily justify the drop in price with the smaller screen and (potentially) smaller/shorter battery and still keep the specs of the $399 iPad 2.

I've been holding out for a smaller iPad since the iPad 2 (I have an iPad 1). The thinner, lighter design was great and I'd love to see it taken to the "next level" with something about the thickness of the iPod touch and <1lbs.

I'm literally days away from buying an iPad 3, though... part of me is thinking "keep holding out" but the rest is betting on the device being artificially handicapped to keep the "main" iPad line from being canibalized.

They're still selling A4 devices (iPod touch and iPhone 4) with 256mb of RAM. Nothing to say they'd not make the iPod mini with the iPod touch parts. Or stick with 8gb of storage and keep the price low (16gb is already too small for me to seriously consider). I'd assume they would use a single core A5 as a minimum, but even that gives me pause for concern.

I guess the likely scenario for me would be get an iPad 3 now and then wait for an iPad "mini" 2 to see if it would be worth the "downgrade" at that point.

chleuasme
Apr 17, 2012, 01:12 PM
What is the interest for Apple in adding fragmentation to their tablet line?
Does Apple want two different devices to allow to do the exact same things?
Do developpers want to have to target two different devices, even if the downsizing to 7.85" would still make app designed for 9.7" usable.
Such a new tablet would sure be nice for its size and weight, but does Apple want 2 similar devices to coexist in the tablet category?


One thing they could do is rather add a new kind of device to their line of product.
One device completely dedicated to consume what they sell on their stores, and more portable than an iPad, with a bigger screen than an iPod Touch.
They seem to have growing interests in ebooks market, they need a better eReader, better than the iPad.
The iPod Touch is perfect for music, but not for reading ebooks nor videos.
The iPad is ok for reading ebooks or watching videos, as long as you have strong forearms, but not really transportable.


Rather than a 7.85" iPad mini, i think they really need a new category of product.
Something like a WiFi touch device with a 6" retina 9:5 screen,
limited to ebooks, music, video, gaming and web, and not necessarily with 3rd party apps.
A good consumer device, directly designed to enjoy on the go the contents sold on their ebooks/music/video/games stores.

The 9:5 ratio is perfect for ebooks in portrait and videos in landscape, the 6" screen would be exactly as wide as is an iPhone in landscape mode and about as tall as an iPad is wide (~135mm x ~75mm), and the device not bigger than a pocket book.
Make it cheap at around 200-250$ with good battery life and storage capacity, and it could almost replace the iPod Touch.

You want to do more and use specific apps? Get a real tablet, get an iPad and take advantage of a full experience at 10".
It's too big for you? Then you don't really want to read ebooks or watch videos comfortably. Get an iPhone/iPod.

the8thark
Apr 17, 2012, 04:09 PM
I've highlighted the points I think are easiest to not agree with.

On the first point, as you say, smaller tablets are not selling because they don't have iOS even though people would like that size. This is a good reason for Apple to make a smaller tablet, but you are saying the opposite.

The second point is very easy to dispute. Tablets were proven not to sell well until the iPad came along.

If the smaller size was so popular they would be selling. But they are not. So it shows people want iOS more then they want smaller hardware. So give the people what they want. iOS. And be done with it. Just like Apple is doing now.

Kind of a myopic view.

I see it in a glass half full way.
I see your points and I agree with you. But there's not enough people who are interested in all of this. I only see a very vocal minority crying for a smaller iPad. I don't see any current iPad owners saying, man I hate this iPad I wish it was smaller. No. They buy the iPad and love it.

And the few who can't afford or justify the cost of an iPad just have to suck up like I do. I do not own an iPad. I can not justify the cost. But that's my loss. Apple makes products at the high end. And I don't want them to stop this.

twoodcc
Apr 17, 2012, 06:10 PM
i guess this rumor will never die. i personally would like to see a smaller iPad to give people more choices

MagnusVonMagnum
Apr 17, 2012, 08:17 PM
I like the idea of a cheaper iPad "Mini". It'd make a perfect whole house audio/video controller and combination couch surfing station. While the iPod Touch does a reasonable job controlling my whole house audio/video system (currently at 4 rooms with audio/video plus 2 more with audio only), the small size of the device makes it uncomfortable to look stuff up on the web while I watch TV (e.g. say I want to look up the status of the OCC foreclosure while watching American Chopper, I can grab my iPod on the table next to me and do so without getting up or turning the show on pause, but it's very small and slow for surfing many sites due to all the 'extra' crap they put on web sites these days like extra ad columns, overlay features and facbook icons, etc.; some pages take FOREVER to load and that's where a larger screen and more CPU power could be very helpful).

But a full sized iPad is an expensive proposition to mostly use as a remote control for the house's audio/video system, particularly if I want them in more than one room. But one in the $200 range would be FAR more reasonable, IMO and the smaller size means it woud fit better on the average end table without sucking up all the space for other things like cup coasters and what not.