Apple's iPad Mini: Thinner, Lighter and Narrower

[GuitarDTO]

Any chance this iPad mini could also have a version that is a phone? Not saying it wouldn't be ridiculous.....but what better way to put a big middle finger to the complaints about phone screen size than to release a 7" monster phone (I would never buy one)

 

[Puonti]

I hope they don't rename it like this:

"We are calling it the small iPad ..." - Tim Cook

There is the new iPad, and then there is the Macbook Pro with Retina Display. I guess it's about time Apple started realising they are stretching their names.

Well it could be just the iPad. They don't differate the names of the MacBooks or iMacs by their size either.

Right - and you got to assume that Apple is set on eventually having "retina" displays on all of their products. Giving retina MacBook Pros an entirely new name revolving around the display would look redundant in a few year's time.

I think Apple just wants to keep their product names simple in the long run (the "New iPad" instead of "iPad 3" is one indication of this - just wait for the "New iPhone"), and get through this transitional period by describing their products as "with X".

 

[SmoMo]

Go grab a piece of paper and fold it in half, then turn it sideways and hold it. That is 5.5 inches wide.

I followed your instructions and ended up with this.

http://lolosad.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/02/origami_cat.jpg

I'm not sure how this relates to your iPad Mini argument.

Perhaps I was holding the paper in the wrong way to begin with, when you say 'then turn it sideways' how do you even know which way I was holding it before the turn?

I am so confused

=^..^=

 

[mdelvecchio]

100% speculation
0% facts.
...
Not a bad article. It's nice to know which other websites believe in this and which are waiting for the facts.

...id wager that sites w/ the name RUMORS in them arent waiting around for facts.

it's MacRUMORS, dude, not MacFacts.

 

[JGowan]

I STILL DON'T BELIEVE APPLE WOULD EVER RELEASE THIS!!
Here's why....Apple once said they were not scared of cannibalizing their pc sales with the iPad but I believe they are scared of cannibalizing their iPad sales!! iPhone is in a whole different league to do it but an iPad mini would kill off the bigger iPad!! Why buy a 600$ iPad when you can get the mini with a slightly smaller screen for a much lower price??
iPad is killing everything right now why mess with success??

Most people who have the iPad, bought it with disposable cash. They weren't on their last dollar. These are the same people that will now go out and buy the iPad Air/Mini. I think Apple is thinking that, rather than cannibalizing the iPad… That actually will be making a second sale to the people who already bought the iPad. I own the new iPad 3. But, I expect to buy this new Apple device as well. I can see instances where it would be very useful.

 

[bawbac]

If battery life is good, then I'm sold.

It's been leaked that battery life is around 5 hours ON and 15 days in standby mode.
When you make current battery technology smaller, you get less output.

 

[LYFK]

Hi,

Please stop these articles about the iPad "mini" like it's a fact. It's not going to happen. I know these sites live off traffic, but please have some self respect. Hint: the fact that other sites also post this ridiculous speculation, does not make it any more likely to happen.

I find it hard to believe that anyone who has paid attention to what Steve and Tim have been saying over the last couple of years, can honestly think that Apple would launch a smaller iPad. For example, Steve's comment about how you would need to sand down your fingers to use a 7" tablet. I think that makes it pretty clear how Apple feels about an iPad "mini". Also, if you listened to the last earnings call, Tim made it clear that Apple doesn't see any significant competition to the iPad.

Apple has thought long and hard before they decided on the iPad size. Like them, I think it's just perfect for surfing the web or watching a movie in bed.

If you still dream about an iPad "mini" - get ready for disappointment.

Daniel

Your logic is pretty flawed. Steve Jobs said a lot of things, and often went back on his words. We wouldn't even have an iPad if he had stuck to his word on tablet computing. The Samsung trials have shown evidence that Apple has had internal discussions on the 7" device category and you can bet they have prototyped it. Whether they will actually make one is of course up for debate. Just because Apple has no competition, doesn't mean they won't continue to push product boundaries.

If you want to get into details about what Steve said, you have to understand that Apple design guidelines specify a minimum 44px x 44px element size. Factor in the original iPhone display size & pixel density and you have an element size of 0.27" or 0.69cm squared. This is not big and the iPhone screen can accommodate roughly 70 interactive elements (rounded down). A bigger screen can accommodate more, simple as that.

The original iPad had a low screen resolution (1024x768) AND low pixel density (132ppi). This roughly equates to a 21x28 grid of elements, or 588 elements (rounded down).

Now we have a basis for argument:

So the iPhone has room for 70 simultaneous interactive elements and the iPad has room for 588 interactive elements. You're saying that there's no reasonable middle ground? The rumored 7.85" iPad would have room for a 17x23 grid of elements, or 391 simultaneous elements (rounded down). That about 1/3rd less than the iPad but still 5.5 times more than an iPhone. I think there is potential there.

A better argument for you would have been the one John Gruber made with respect to the fact that a 7.85" iPad with a resolution of 1024x768 makes no sense because the display density is too low for a 'Retina-class' device. This argument has less to do with the number of interactive elements, and more to do with the appropriate format and distance for content display. At a display size of 7.85" and at a distance of maybe 15", the resolution of an iPad 'Mini' should be something close to 1440px x 1080px.

Which brings us back into the realm of speculation (constructively, I hope).

 

[mdelvecchio]

it will NOT BE $200.00 Apple doesnt sell cheap devices.

how do you explain the $50 ipod? hmm.

They don't care if you think is overpriced they will sell well bc they are an Apple device. The Power of branding.

ah of course -- its all branding. not having the best quality product on the market at all. riiight...

----------

Yeah he is drinking lots of kool-aid by the end of his article.
...
Likewise the whole argument he makes in previous arguments for the iPad mini as being "just a smaller iPad". Well the iPad has no "right way is up" orientation. landscape and portrait should be about the same handling characteristics. Now all of a sudden it is OK to deeply prune two of the bezel edges.

yep, it is ok. look at the iphone -- while the homescreen icons dont rotate, most of the built-in apps support landscape. i imagine the mini will as well, including icons.

----------

Explain to me why Apple would want to have a smaller iPad.

marketshare; to prevent the umbrella effect.

while marketshare is good now, due to the umbrella effect which allows competing sellers to release smaller & cheaper tablets, apple will lose marketshare ground. despite great profits, if they want to "seal the deal" on the tablet space they need to go for marketshare at just the right time. they never did this w/ the Mac and look what happened. they know this now. see this chart:

http://www.iamconcise.com/main/the-reason-for-the-ipad-mini.html

...thats it.

----------

Correct me if I'm mistaken, but that is clearly 6 words!!!

( Unless you are claiming that all of a sudden exclamation marks are no longer words. )

Perhaps you should consider flying your space rocket back to outer space and study maths, then you can come back to planet Earth when you can count to 6 without getting lost along the way!

uh, no. punctuation does not affect word count. sorry. go for your GED...

 

[DiamonDecoden]

when will they release this? Is this even true?
If this is true, I want to wait to get this one instead of another iPad 2. Does it comes with 3G?

 

[yesnek]

still don't believe it.
if there's an ipad mini in the making, where are the leaked parts?

 

[glennyboiwpg]

I STILL DON'T BELIEVE APPLE WOULD EVER RELEASE THIS!!
Here's why....Apple once said they were not scared of cannibalizing their pc sales with the iPad but I believe they are scared of cannibalizing their iPad sales!! iPhone is in a whole different league to do it but an iPad mini would kill off the bigger iPad!! Why buy a 600$ iPad when you can get the mini with a slightly smaller screen for a much lower price??
iPad is killing everything right now why mess with success??

If you read Steve Job's bioagraphy, he says that you should "never be afraid to cannibalize your own product, because if you don't, someone else will".

I know SJ is no longer with us but I bet that train of thought is probably baked right into the company.

Its how they do business.

 

[PracticalMac]

No rear camera, no buy.

 

[D.T.]

I think Apple is thinking that, rather than cannibalizing the iPad… That actually will be making a second sale to the people who already bought the iPad.

I think it's also important to Apple, to provide a competitive entry point for their ecosystem. Somebody buys a cheap Android tablet now, that might mean they buy an Android phone, a more expensive android tablet later - and, they become a customer of Google's ecosystem.

Somebody buys a competitively priced Apple tablet now, they're potentially being queued up for a larger iPad, an iPhone, a Macbook Pro, plus all those apps, music, movies, etc.

 

[The Economist]

If it is priced at around $249, would Apple keep the iPod Touch around? Who would buy a $199 iPod when for a bit more money an iPad can be bought? Unless that person is looking for extreme portability…

 

[PatriotInvasion]

I STILL DON'T BELIEVE APPLE WOULD EVER RELEASE THIS!!
Here's why....Apple once said they were not scared of cannibalizing their pc sales with the iPad but I believe they are scared of cannibalizing their iPad sales!! iPhone is in a whole different league to do it but an iPad mini would kill off the bigger iPad!! Why buy a 600$ iPad when you can get the mini with a slightly smaller screen for a much lower price??
iPad is killing everything right now why mess with success??

While Apple sells A LOT of $500+ iPads, they will sell A TON of $249 iPads Mini's. Of all the people that opt for the cheaper iPad, think of the percentage of those people who were never in the market for a $500+ iPad to begin with.

Let the consumer decide if they want to pay the extra money for the bigger Retina display. Meanwhile, Apple sells millions of more iPads than they are now. It worked for the Nano.

 

[jamesjingyi]

If it is priced at around $249, would Apple keep the iPod Touch around? Who would buy a $199 iPod when for a bit more money an iPad can be bought? Unless that person is looking for extreme portability…

They might just lower the price of the Touch. I thought it was really overpriced. Maybe to $160 since its underpowered and has a bad camera??

 

[dontwalkhand]

If it is priced at around $249, would Apple keep the iPod Touch around? Who would buy a $199 iPod when for a bit more money an iPad can be bought? Unless that person is looking for extreme portability…

I have a strong feeling this would replace the iPod touch, and they would just say something like, If you want portability, use your phone.

 

[skellener]

Just curious....there have been a lot of leaks of photos of parts for the next iPhone and cases to go with it. All I've seen for a smaller iPad are artists renderings. No actual leaks of anything regarding a real product. Do you guys really think there is a smaller iPad coming out? The only thing that may be announced with regard to the iPad is a new dock connector. What's gonna happen if the next event debuts only a new iPhone and no smaller iPad?

 

[stukick]

$199 and I'm there.

 

[cvam1985]

Awh I was hoping for the thicker, heavier and wider iPad Max. maxiPad?

Drum, drum, cymbal

 

[JAT]

errr, the whole point of making an iPad-slightly-mini with a 4:3 screen at the same resolution would be for iPad apps compatibility.
Different way to use it and situations (portability would be better, etc), ok, but that will still be an iPad with same apps.
Or you imply devs will target either both size or specifically one only, and then, welcome fragmentation.
The whole idea of this 7.85" would be to prevent that exactly.

What's your point?

Resolution =! size. Therefore, these are different products. Every thread about this rumor has been filled with moronic statements about how the iPad already exists and this is stupid. It's a (slightly) different product for (slightly) different uses, not a replacement for the standard iPad. That's my point.

^^^this sounds like you're contradicting your own point a lil, but...

It's rare but it's far from the first time.

People said the same thing about the Motorola Razr, and the Nokia 9860 before that. For as long as there's been a class of product, there's been a best-of.

But if people always went with the better product over what was more popular, we'd all have been rockin Beta VCRs in the 80s.

People shop for what they want before they buy what they need. Oldest rule ever.

I'll say it differently: I'm pointing out that those people usually get junk because they don't shop well, or intelligently. It's different with the iDevices. Lucky them.

RAZR: came out after the first iPod, not exactly before Apple's run. Also, only one model had the high-quality status. My RAZR2, for instance, was decent quality hardware, but software sucked and made it nearly useless. I would've thought someone would come back with the Model T to prove me wrong, actually.
Beta: if it had become mass-market, it would also have had far more cheap crap models, like VHS did. What people ignore about that whole 'war' is that there were very fine VHS models, if you shopped and paid for them. The "cheapness" of VHS compared to the "high-end" of Beta was not a function of the technology, but of the markets and consumer.

 

[fertilized-egg]

I have a strong feeling this would replace the iPod touch, and they would just say something like, If you want portability, use your phone.

I think a new iPod Touch will still be a very strong seller. Many want an iPod Touch for its portability and even just as an MP3 player. Younger audience as well as those who use Android , Blackberry, etc also often buy iPod Touch just to get to the iPhone ecosystem in a small package. The iPad Mini size is nice but still isn't pocketable.

 

[anonymouslurker]

...They sell something because they believe it's what's right not just to fill in the need of a smaller iPad!!

So, they're not looking to maximize their sales after all?

What's better for Apple? A $300 sale for a smaller iPad, or no sale at all because a potential customer who has a specific need for that form factor goes and picks up a Kindle Fire or a Nexus 7?

 

[Ryth]

No rear camera, no buy.

Latest leaks on 9-5 mac/gizmodo show a rear shell with a camera opening...

http://gizmodo.com/5934851/rumor-th...zel-and-look-more-like-an-iphone-than-an-ipad

 

[chleuasme]

If you want to get into details about what Steve said, you have to understand that Apple design guidelines specify a minimum 44px x 44px element size. Factor in the original iPhone display size & pixel density and you have an element size of 0.27" or 0.69cm squared. This is not big and the iPhone screen can accommodate roughly 70 interactive elements (rounded down). A bigger screen can accommodate more, simple as that.

The original iPad had a low screen resolution (1024x768) AND low pixel density (132ppi). This roughly equates to a 21x28 grid of elements, or 588 elements (rounded down).

Now we have a basis for argument:

So the iPhone has room for 70 simultaneous interactive elements and the iPad has room for 588 interactive elements. You're saying that there's no reasonable middle ground? The rumored 7.85" iPad would have room for a 17x23 grid of elements, or 391 simultaneous elements (rounded down). That about 1/3rd less than the iPad but still 5.5 times more than an iPhone. I think there is potential there.

Your logic is pretty flawed

Using your same metric of interactive elements (to be discussed), both the iPad and the iPad mini would have the same 391 elts. You have to count in pixels, as 44 px is still true for iPads apps.
That's the whole point of staying at the same resolution and use the pixel density of non-retina iPhones: iPad apps would run at 1:1 (pixel wise) and the 44 px minimal large touch area would be at the physical size it was decided to be initially, and kept with the original iPad (in pixel count).

Resolution =! size. Therefore, these are different products.

no kidding Einstein, resolution != size
You still do not answer, though.

Same apps are supposed to be used/usable on both the iPad and the iPad mini,
The iPad mini as shown here (or worse, with larger bezel) is not much more portable than the original iPad,
Tell me what is so different with a mini iPad, out of its obvious smaller size/weight. Simply a variation on the Tablet form factor, like seen with MacBooks?

It's a (slightly) different product for (slightly) different uses, not a replacement for the standard iPad. That's my point.

My initial question was: would iPad apps really flawlessly support the shrink?
You are answering me on something else, of course that wouldn't be a replacemement. WTH