Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Apple Reportedly Planning to Launch Smaller iPad in Early 2011

Makes perfect sense to me. They had great success with the iPod, iPod Nano, and iPod shuffle, so why not the same diversification for the iPad/iPod touch line. As I understand it, the iPad is a bit too big/heavy to hold and read with one hand. Fix this with a cheaper, smaller, lighter model that's handbag sized, the size of a mass market paperback. This sounds like a very reasonable spread on screen sizes:

3.5 inch screen on the iPad Touch
6-7 inch screen on this mini iPad
10 inch screen on the iPad
13-14 inch screen on large iPad

I don't understand why people are so negative about this -- "please Apple, give us less choice, we want fewer options, please decide for us what's best for every one of us."

And developers having to develop for 3 size screens instead of 2? I don't see this as a significant problem. Buck up people, make your apps run on more than one size screen. Not that hard. (And someone made a good point that the iPad screen resolution is not that dense, so you might end up with the same resolution in a smaller screen.) Skate to where the puck is going not where it is now. Who want's a future with only two screen sizes?
 
6-7" is the size they should have started with. The current iPad is too heavy and awkward to be the grandparent computer many are touting it to be.
 
I file this one into the false rumor category. However, sometimes i swear apple just leaks stuff like this through back channels so that they can float design ideas past the apple faithful. Well Apple, if you are listening, this is NOT a worthwhile design.
 
Small White Car said:
Nah, what they REALLY need to do is make a touch-screen remote and include it with the Apple TV. Same exact case as the iPod Touch but ALL it does is work with the Apple TV. It'll come with the Apple 'Remote' app and nothing else on it. They can make them cheaper since they have almost no local storage. Just enough for the app.

Apple TV = ok
Apple TV + iPhone w/ Remote App = AMAZING

If they can get that experience into every Apple TV box (and not just to those of us with iPhones) then the Apple TV will become a LOT more popular.

I bet that in a year or two they'll be able to make that kind of remote cheaply enough to include in every box for free.
Click to expand...
You think capacitive touchscreen with 2 way communication comes for less than $100? Let alone free? And for a device with what, 5 buttons really?

Any decent universal remote on the market can already duplicate this, many for less than Apple charges for their current remote. That just doesn't add up.
 
Give me a lighter SafariPad with plug-in support for $199 and you have a sale.

I think they should compact the lines to say 32 or 64 GB and differentiate based on size after that.
 
The headline for the "report" is bogus. A smaller iPad IS and iPod Touch. The iPod Touch already fills that role, and could easily be updated as the article describes.

With the iPad on the scene, this whole mess only makes sense one way.

next revision of the iPhone/iPT gets a closer design to the iPad, and the the iPod Touch gets re-named iPad Nano, or Mini, or whatever.

That would actually make a bit of sense... Touch-screen devices named iPad or iPhone, non-touch-screen devices retaining the iPod name, namely the scroll-wheel Nano, and the buttonless shuffle.

I could see both the iPod Touch -> iPad Nano, gaining the look and feel of a ~5" diagonal screen, perhaps Super-AMOLED with the tighter multi-touch digitizer integration and higher resolution, and no-backlight requirement, in a thinner but slightly wider and longer casing. If they maximize the screen real-estate, and minimize the bezel area, perhaps mimimizing the home button, or placing it in the lateral edge or something... I could see perhaps a significantly more useable screen size increase, with a minimum increase in overall dimension, to still remain fairly "pocketable."

Basically the iPad 3G downsized to 4th gen iPhone might be a similar improvement, although perhaps not quite as much screen size increase, in order to maintain speaker, microphone, and other phone functions within the boundaries of the casing... Minimum bezel area would be harder to achieve with more hardware associated with phone usage, especially with proximity sensors and perhaps a front-facing camera. With all of that, iPhone may have to stand out a bit from looking like a small iPad, even if the next iteration of iPod Touch does become a small iPad version.

It does make some sense to move toward a bit of a four-square product matrix between iPad, iPad 3g, iPad nano (future-formerly iPod Touch), and iPhone. big size or small size, cell-tranciever on board, or no cell service on board.
 
srauber said:
This reminds me on something said in this forum. He said that his relationship with his wife has changed positively with his new Ipad cause he was playing with his new toy and let his wife watch her TV soaps. Maybe he should have played with his wife then the relationship would not be the problem :):D
Click to expand...

Sounds like a temporary solution to a relationship problem. The fighting will resume when the power is out and the iPad battery dies. :)
 
The reason this isn't going to happen is that there's no (virtual) shelf space for it.

Take a look at the product line up. The iPod touch goes from $199 to $299 to $399.

The iPad picks up at $499, $599, $699 (and 3G for an extra $130).

A smaller iPad needs to fit between the touch and the iPad. Sure, they could go with 16GB and price it at $299 or something so there's overlap, but overlap creates confusion, something Apple always tries to avoid.

There's also the issue of what purpose does this serve. The smaller iPad wouldn't fit in a pocket, but would be too small to display things like the full sized iPad. It would be a bad experience.
 
This would be more along the lines of what I wanted anyways.

Given that the screen comes in an HD ratio and is still pocketable this would fit my needs far better than an IPad. IPad is to big and the screen is less than optimal for playing back video.

If this thing is real they better put in 512MB of RAM too. I'm already getting the impression that Apples approach to multi tasking is going to suck, but even so iPads greatest short coming for new apps is the lack of RAM.

Dave
 
MacSlut said:
The reason this isn't going to happen is that there's no (virtual) shelf space for it.

Take a look at the product line up. The iPod touch goes from $199 to $299 to $399.

The iPad picks up at $499, $599, $699 (and 3G for an extra $130).

A smaller iPad needs to fit between the touch and the iPad. Sure, they could go with 16GB and price it at $299 or something so there's overlap, but overlap creates confusion, something Apple always tries to avoid.

There's also the issue of what purpose does this serve. The smaller iPad wouldn't fit in a pocket, but would be too small to display things like the full sized iPad. It would be a bad experience.
Click to expand...

You were doing good until the last part. Then it's just assumptions and opinion on your part. Apple could merge the Touch line into the iPad line
Or just offer the Touch with the iPhone resolution and a smaller iPad with the iPad resolution. People would be free to buy what fits their needs and the lines are distinct and Apple sells even more product. Win win as far as I see it.
 
Unlikely. iPad apps are 1024x768. An iPad mini will have to use the same resolution, which would make icons absurdly small. Rolling out separate apps just for iPad mini is overkill as well.
 
Take away the bezel, and you have the smaller iPad without losing anything.

It could be the second generation iPad, replacing the first generation iPad, and not an additional model.
 
It depends upon what sort of experience you are looking for.

Somebody from San Francisco ought to know that!

MacSlut said:
The reason this isn't going to happen is that there's no (virtual) shelf space for it.
Click to expand...
Shelf space is easy to fine. Especially if you refactor existing hardware. Apple should be able to lower the price on Touches considerably by the use of custom hardware. After all Apple explicitly said that the Touches where designed to be their low cost product.
Take a look at the product line up. The iPod touch goes from $199 to $299 to $399.
Click to expand...
Yep and with a little work they can knock of $100 on each of those.
The iPad picks up at $499, $599, $699 (and 3G for an extra $130).

A smaller iPad needs to fit between the touch and the iPad. Sure, they could go with 16GB and price it at $299 or something so there's overlap, but overlap creates confusion, something Apple always tries to avoid.
Click to expand...
More BS. The size of the screen is enough to set the mid size device apart. There would be no overlap if the devices used the same processor and flash because it is all about the screen. Frankly it is what many of us want.
There's also the issue of what purpose does this serve. The smaller iPad wouldn't fit in a pocket, but would be too small to display things like the full sized iPad. It would be a bad experience.
Click to expand...

Depends upon your pocket! More so it depends upon what you can tolerate when carrying it around. On top of that if the aspect ratio is HD or wider the device will fit in places the fat iPad ratio devices can't.

What you are missing here is that screens in this size give you the most realestate in a portable package. Portable as in fitting a pocket or hand well. The whole idea here isn't to display as an iPad would but to simply use the screen to it's advantage. E-Book readers would be fine even if a reflow was required for example. Frankly I think the experience would be better than the iPad. In effect this would be the bigger Touch and just as handy.


Dave
 
Why, there is no reason at all to track iPad.

drjsway said:
Unlikely. iPad apps are 1024x768. An iPad mini will have to use the same resolution, which would make icons absurdly small. Rolling out separate apps just for iPad mini is overkill as well.
Click to expand...

It is all about a device designed to be as large as possible and still fit pockets. This means an HD sized or wider device. If the unit is done right 2X Touch apps would work just fine. Besides Apple has been telling developers for years now not to assume anyone screen resolution. An odd resolution won't be a problem for app developers that actually listen.

Besides you don't think IPhone resolution will remain the same forever do you? There is a very good possibility that iPhone resolution will change with the next rev anyways. You are excited over nothing.

Dave
 
I think it's excellent and the form factor they should have used in the first place. something like a real 16*9 for horizontal movies and turn it for reading and interacting with pages of text. thumbable keyboard in portrait and touch typing horizontal == makes SO much sense. sign me up!
 
As many resolutions as they see fit.

atari1356 said:
and is this one going to have a different resolution too?
Click to expand...
Sure! What do you want any ways, big blocky pixels.
How many different resolutions is Apple going to make developers support?
Click to expand...
Developers are forced to do nothing. It is up to the developer to support the device.

Besides Apple has been telling developers for years now that the have to write their apps to support other resolutions. If developers aren't listening then screw them! That may sound rough but really I find it amazing that so many developers try to spit into the wind with respect to Touch device development.

I don't see this happening.
Click to expand...

Not only do I see it happening ultimately I think it will be very successful. The two ingredients are that the screen be HD ratio or wider and the device remains pocketable. Also assuming big pockets here. Such a device would quickly out sell iPad.

Dave
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back