iPad What are the chances of a 16:9 iPad?

Discussion in 'iPad' started by dingdongbubble, Jul 12, 2013.

  1. macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2007
    #1
    If the iPad mini were to go retina with 326 ppi in the next gen then they would want something to differentiate between the iPad mini and full size iPad. Apple has shown with the iPhone 5 that they can successfully increase the length of the screen without many problems. So how about a longer 16:9 ratio iPad with stereo speakers to differentiate it from a regular 4:3 retina iPad mini. Any chances of this?
     
  2. macrumors G3

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2007
    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    #2
    Stereo front facing speakers I would like, but no thank you to 16:9. This picture shows why 4:3, the bottom image, is superior for web browsing.

    [​IMG]
     
  3. macrumors 68030

    Shanghaichica

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2013
    Location:
    UK
    #3
    I really hope they don't make a 16:9 iPad. It's nice to be able to use it in portrait mode. I have a samsung galaxy tab 2 10.1 and I can only really use it in landscape mode and even that is quite awkward. I need to use it in a case with a stand. Using it naked is not an option because its awkward to hold. IMO 16:9 is only good for watching videos.
     
  4. macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2009
  5. macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2012
    #5
    Agreed, 4:3 while it might suck for movies, is great for everything else. I will take the sacrifice on the movies.
     
  6. macrumors 6502a

    mpayne2k

    Joined:
    May 12, 2010
    #6
    4:3 is superior for books and magazines, and movies still have black bars on 16:9, so I think Apple should just stick with what has worked.
     
  7. macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2013
    #7
    There's no way in hell that's ever going to happen, thank goodness.
     
  8. macrumors G3

    QuarterSwede

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2005
    Location:
    Colorado Springs, CO
    #8
    Very little chance. Apple wants you to be able to use the iPad in whatever orientation suits you. As others have said 16:9 is only really good for video. For everything else (pretty much most of your time) 4:3 lets you use landscape or portrait with comfort and ease. This is the main reason I'm almost never in landscape on my iPhone 5. When texting you get 2 lines to see what is posted. It's fairly awful.
     
  9. macrumors G4

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    #9
    The main FAIL of a tablet is being widescreen.
     
  10. macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2013
    #10
    Most of the reasons why people buy ipad is because of the things they can do better with that screen. no way will we see one with a 16:9 screen. So what its not the best for watching movies but its the best at everything else in the form factor it has. TVs are for movies not tablets. Leave it to stupid android companies to ******* up their designs with a wide screen
     
  11. macrumors 604

    cynics

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2012
    #11
    I like both 4:3 and 16:9. Both compromise on something. Overall I'm used to 16:9 though, every screen, monitor, etc in my house has been 16:9 for the last 5+ years.

    Whats the difference between iOS on a 16:9 iPhone 5? Its not a bad experience.

    I prefer 4:3 for web browsing and PDF reading. But 16:9 is a much better experience for video watching and gaming. The biggest thing I personally do on a tablet is watch videos on YouTube I'm subscribed too and Netflix, HBO, hulu plus etc.

    All depends on what you're into...
     
  12. macrumors 65816

    AQUADock

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2011
    #12
    Hopefully the ipad will stay 4:3, it's a much more superior aspect ratio for small screens than 16:9.
     
  13. macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2010
    #13
    But what about Apple trying to make al devices uniform regarding screen size.
    The new cheaper iPhone is rumored to be there because Apple likes to have the same screen-size on all devices. No more iPhone 4 screen. cheaper iPhone as base model.
    Shouldn't they change the ipad for the same reason?
    Makes it easier for developers to develop their apps. iPhone-ipad.

    Bart
     
  14. macrumors 65816

    ctdonath

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2009
    #14
    16:9? No. Not a chance.

    However, in context of your questions, notice that removing the bezel from the iPad practically gives you a retina iPad Mini with a bigger screen (same overall dimensions give or take a few millimeters). Smarten up the gesture recognition and you won't need a bezel (recognizes a "holding touch" as just gripping the device and ignores it, focusing on other discernible touch events). From this view, the iPad Mini just looks like a stopgap product while they shrink & eliminate the bezel from the full size iPad.
     
  15. macrumors 604

    Piggie

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2010
    #15
    And neither will Apple ever make a smaller iPad.

    Oh, wait. they did..............................

    ----------


    You mean like an iPhone, Small screen should be 4:3 ?

    ----------

    Problem is we have a lot of glass is half empty people here.

    they see a 16:9 tablet as smaller, when actually it's bigger and shows more.
     
  16. macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2013
    #16
    What exactly would be the point of changing the aspect ratio to 16:9? I can see why they lengthened the height of the iPhone, but I don't see why they would change the aspect ratio of the iPads.

    A 9.7 inch (diagonal) display with a 4:3 aspect ratio will have more screen area vs a 9.7 inch (diagonal) display with a 16:9 aspect ratio.
     
  17. macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2012
    Location:
    Perth, Western Australia
    #17
    Hopefully ZERO.

    I've used 16x9 tablets, and they're unwieldy - pretty much useless in portrait mode as they're far too narrow.

    Much like 16x9 screens... 16x10 (golden ratio) would be better, but to be honest I don't have an issue with the current form factor. It's a good compromise between physical size and usable screen area.


    edit:
    I'm not keen on the idea of the elongation of the iphone either. MAYBE it's a win there for people who want to watch video on it as the screen is ultra small, but honestly, the iphone isn't really ever going to be a good device for watching video.
     
  18. macrumors G3

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2007
    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    #18
    Take a look at the image I posted and tell me how the 16:9 shows more.
     
  19. Piggie, Jul 18, 2013
    Last edited: Jul 18, 2013

    macrumors 604

    Piggie

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2010
    #19
    Because you have made the classic error.

    You think that to make a 4:3 screen into a 16:9 screen you remove the width to change the aspect ration. making it narrower/smaller.

    Whereas you can think of it exactly the opposite, leave the width exactly as it s and ADD to the length.

    Just as apple did with the iPhone.

    You don't think the new iPhone screen is smaller than the last iPhone screen do you as they changed the aspect ration?

    No, you and everyone can see it's BIGGER as they make it longer.

    Which is why I say, and people here can't grasp. 16:9 is Bigger, not smaller.
    You ADD length/mode screen real estate to the current screen.

    Allowing more to be displayed on the screen.

    Absolutely ideal in portrait mode, as you have move of a web page on screen and when you call up the on screen keyboard, in say pages, or another program, do can have the keyboard at the bottom without losing so much screen above it.

    It's been proven time and time and time again when people have done forum poll that most people use these devices in Landscape mode most of the time.
    We all know that wider would in the future give the ability to display 2 apps (a little like the Msoft surface does) so you do not have to exit email to look at the web page and then exit the web page to go back to the email, as an example.
    16:10 would probably be the best compromise.
    Better for gaming, better for movies, better for productivity apps, better for future multitasking, and in portrait mode, more web page on display and more document space above the virtual keyboard.

    It's really win win win.
     
  20. darngooddesign, Jul 18, 2013
    Last edited: Jul 18, 2013

    macrumors G3

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2007
    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    #20
    You made the classic error of forgetting that iOS scales its apps to he width of the device.

    I presented visual evidence that you would see less when surfing. On my iPhone 5, I see less content in landscape because the apps are fullscreen. Now maybe if iOS were set up with windowed apps that don't scale to the width of the screen, or did a dual app display like W8, you would have a point, but iOS 7 is not set up like that and there is no indication that iOS 8 will be either.

    So point out in my image where the 16:9 tablet shows more than the 4:3 iPad.

    PS. If iOS displayed two apps side by side I would say that a widescreen tablet is better, but in the current iOS 4:3 is better.
     
  21. macrumors 604

    Piggie

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2010
    #21
    Yes, I totally agree with you with iOS as it currently stands.

    However, if you think about it, really, it's a Non Issue.

    I'm sure you would agree with me that IF apple did launch a table with a 16:10 aspect ratio, then they would alter iOS to take advantage of the extra screen area and enhance the viewings/operating experience.

    Of course they would change it, to give you a better UI they would be fools not to.
     
  22. macrumors G3

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2007
    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    #22
    I agree that currently a 16:10 iPad would be bad, but a 16:10 iPad with a fundamentally revamped iOS that displays dual apps would be good.

    Not sure who is agreeing with whom. :D
     
  23. macrumors member

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2011
    #23
    Why don't manufacturers understand that 16:9 or 16:10 don't work?
     
  24. macrumors 604

    Piggie

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2010
    #24
    In who's opinion ?

    You know full well, if Apple had launched the iPad in 16:10 and it had always been 16:10, then almost everyone here would be saying that's right.

    And if Samsung or Microsoft then launched their tablets at 4:3 you would be laughing at them.

    Ok, So, if Apple did launch a 16:10 iPad alongside the 4:3 model you don't think it would sell ?
     
  25. macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2013
    Location:
    Pennsylvania
    #25
    We had a Samsung Note 10.1 and Note 8.0, and never tried an iPad before buying the Samsung devices. Using the 16:9 Samsungs in portrait mode (which we did) was annoying because of height, and once we tried iPads, we realized that 4:3 required less scrolling in landscape. The Samsungs are gone, and we both have iPads. My phone is a cheapy Samsung that looks like it's been through he!!. I do have an iPod 5G, and the longer screen is fine, but still requires more scrolling landscape mode. Protrait mode isn't awkward to hold because it's small, but text become impossibly small whe viewing websites in portrait. Oddly enough, book are easier to read in portrait on the iPod.
     

Share This Page