Fragmentation means many different things. Please explain your usage of it within this context of iPads please.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Reportedly Looking to Launch âiPad Miniâ Priced at $249-$299 in Q3
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Fragmentation means many different things. Please explain your usage of it within this context of iPads please.
If Apple
makes a 7.85 iPad with little to no bezel, like this:
(That's 7.85 screen image on Kindle Touch)
You could do this:
(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:
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.
makes a 7.85 iPad with little to no bezel, like this:
(That's 7.85 screen image on Kindle Touch)
You could do this:
(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:
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Last edited:
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.
iPad mini
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
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
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.
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?
They will leverage Anobit technology to deliver 16GB of stable NAND storage. The rest will be taking advantage of higher integrated parts.
I don't know, I can see a 16GB iPod touch at $199, the iPad mini at $299, and the iPad 2 at $399.
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.
Last edited:
smaller devices take significantly more engineering chops. Case in point.
iPhone 4s 16GB = $649
New iPad 16GB LTE = $629
iPhone 4s 16GB = $649
New iPad 16GB LTE = $629
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.
Last edited:
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
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?
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?
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.
----------
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.
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.
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.
Except that the hypothetical iPad Mini isn't "this very useful size" by which you're probably refering to the 7" Android tablets.
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.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'.
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'.
My guess is that he'd diss 7" even more and claim 7.85" is the best.
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.Regular sized iPad rocks
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
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
Last edited:
No HDMI, No MiniSD, No Sale.
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.
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.
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.
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.