Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Carbon Fiber is expensive. I can see Apple going with a plastic backing, like the 3G or 3GS. I think it will definitely have 512MB of RAM, and two cameras, like the iPod Touch. Maybe for EU compliance, they kick in half of the camera kit for compliance.
 
Steve has also "made it clear":

-No Mac App Store
-No Apple eBook reader
-No video iPod
-No Apple tablet
-No Apple cell phone
-No need for a camera on the iPod touch
-No plans to make the iPad hardware switch user customizable between mute and screen lock
-No third party apps on the iPhone
-No raising iTunes prices

Quote any of those except for video.
You can't.
 
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)

LiquidMetal> Carbon Fibre.
 
I found the iPad to be incredibly uncomfortable to type on while holding so a 7" model would be ideal in soo many ways.
You've been holding/positioning it wrong ;) (as Jobs would tell you). Honestly, it's no touch-typist replacement for a long shot (unless you buy a case with a resting position).

7" is well too small unless you have small fingers or are under 12 year old with the current iOS.

To me, the weight is perfect as a lighter iPad would make it a little unsterdy. Will be a shame to see the aluminium back go :(.
 
As a side note, I was reading on one of the other tech sites today that the iPad 1.0 has a less than 2% return rate. Whereas the Galaxy Tab has a 15-16% - although Samsung won't confirm this (big surprise).

I don't think it's the 7" size that's sending them back... it's probably the Android 2.1 OS... that has to be clunky on a tablet.

Anyway... thought this was interesting and thought I'd share.

Samsung has actually denied the 15-16% return rate thing, claiming less-than 2% return rate. Now we don't know who is telling the truth.

It is Samsung who touted 2M units sold, then said actual sales to customers are "quite small", but then says the transcription of what they said was wrong and they actually said that sales to customers were "quite smooth" (which sounds more like the description of peanut butter, and not at all like a description of unit sales).

Now Samsung says the return rate is less-than 2% and that ITG is fabricating their number. Maybe Samsung means that less than 2% of the units shipped have been returned to them. But if you look at the percentage of units sold to customers that are returned then you get the 15-16% number. This is why statistics are the best lies in the world.

I will stay say that I have NEVER seen anybody holding a Galaxy Tab in an airport, in a mall, in a bookstore, at the library, at my kid's school, at church or anywhere. I have seen people using iPads in all those places.

The only place I have seen Galaxy Tab is on the demonstration counter at Best Buy. I played with one to compare it. It was cute, but seemed more like a media player than a tablet. I think Honeycomb will be a real contender in the tablet space.

The one thing I find funny is this. This time last year all the naysayers claimed Apple would sell hardly any iPads and that there was no market for tablets. Apple proved that their tablet could sell 15M units. Now this year all the naysayers are saying that Honeycomb will outshine the iPad.

It just seems to me that some people don't know what to think until Apple makes an announcement and then they form their opinion in direct opposition to anything Apple promotes. Apple could say that the sky is blue, and the naysayers would scream that Android gives you a choice of colors.
 
Just give me a faster processor and some type of improved display... even if it isn't "retina".

Here's a guess, FWIW. Yes, Steve said smaller tablets don't cut it. But 'Retina' displays can't (pragmatically) be made big enough for the 10" tablets - yet. What if they CAN be made for smaller 7" tablets? You'd get a 'full' iPad display on a smaller screen, yet have more screen real estate than an iPhone. And you'd size it so iPad apps would translate automatically to the smaller screen (developers would not need to make yet another customized version).

Seems to me this is a nicely-differentiated product that fills a niche, although - like the iPad itself - there's no knowing for sure until the product is out there in the marketplace. And with iPhones and iPads flying off the shelves, why not go for it?
 
Cheaper 7" and 9.7" "Retina" type display could be an option for future models. Like the article says, it's unclear if the 7" components would ever see production. They might have just wanted to see the cost/ease of manufacture of a smaller screen with the same old resolution. 7" iPad weighing in at around $349-399 would be very intriguing. And they would be able to wave an even lower price point around in ads :)

Carbon fibre is an interesting thought, personally don't give a crap but it might make the wifi/cellular signal stronger wouldn't it? IIRC they needed a plastic window on an aluminum backed one.

I can see them at least making a mockup/prototype of an iPad with carbon fibre and/or gorilla glass back panel. Why not slap a prototype together to see how it would look/feel? Obviously the glass back would require a complete antenna overhaul. Hopefully no fiasco this time ;)
 
Carbon fiber iPad? No thanks, tacky, too much aftermarket souped-up car feel. :rolleyes:

get use to it, its the future.

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)

LiquidMetal> Carbon Fibre.

LiquidMetal is probably too heavy and probably less impact resistant.
 
Multiple sizes of iPad? Yes—bigger AND smaller—someday, when the market is larger and more mature. It makes little sense to fragment the situation for developers this early, when the 10” is a great unit anyway. Especially if Apple makes the 10” lighter.
 
Carbon Fiber would yield very little weight savings over aluminum while costing more (I'm guessing). So I doubt it. The weight of the iPad is 50% battery and 50% display panel. The aluminum shell weighs very little.

Apparently, it's weightless. ;)

Here's a guess, FWIW. Yes, Steve said smaller tablets don't cut it. But 'Retina' displays can't (pragmatically) be made big enough for the 10" tablets - yet. What if they CAN be made for smaller 7" tablets? You'd get a 'full' iPad display on a smaller screen, yet have more screen real estate than an iPhone. And you'd size it so iPad apps would translate automatically to the smaller screen (developers would not need to make yet another customized version).

Seems to me this is a nicely-differentiated product that fills a niche, although - like the iPad itself - there's no knowing for sure until the product is out there in the marketplace. And with iPhones and iPads flying off the shelves, why not go for it?

Doing that would do exactly what Jobs said he didn't want. What you are suggesting would take existing apps and shrink them. That includes shrinking down buttons and other interactive touch elements. This is what he was talking about when he made the "sandpaper your fingertips" comment.
 
carbon fiber use

anybody who pooh poohs carbon fiber doesn't really know about it.

it's stronger than steel and for sure stronger than aluminum
it's lighter than aluminum
it has better electrical conductivity than copper
it is good enough 'beauty wise' to be used on bmws and boeing dream jets
there are more plusses but for me the best part is,

my carbon fiber stock went up over 20% today
 
When Steve Jobs says something, he means it. And he will never change his mind. Until he changes his mind.

Apple has a seven inch iPad ready. _If_ someone, like Samsung, sells _significant_ numbers of 7 inch tablets demonstrating that there is a market, Apple will release it. If nobody manages to sell them in numbers, then the 7 inch iPad will never see the light of day.

i'd agree with this. it's probably ready to go depending on the market. let samsung take the hit if it's truly DOA :) kind of clever
 
iPad weight distribution

Aluminum back: 138 grams,
Battery: 148 grams,
LCD: 153 grams,
Glass (and frame): 193 grams,
Speaker: 17 grams,
Main board: 21 grams,
Everything else: 27 grams
 
There will be NO 7" iPad! Apple doesn't have any price point room for it. The baseline iPad bumps right into the top of the line iPod touch.
 
No carbon fiber back. It will be glass. As will the protective binder...

You are close but it will actually be a 2nd LCD. Combined with the front camera people can watch you watching your iPad. Then throw in the rear facing camera and with some augmented reality it would be just like looking through a pane of glass. :cool:
 
I am 110% on board with a 7" iPad.

Personally, I would go with the 10" (unless in person the 7" just really managed to sway me), but I really think Apple is grossly overlooking the potential for a 7" tablet. There are many, many situations where 7" would be the perfect size.

For example, I remember hearing that several restaurants are testing the use of iPads as a way of taking peoples orders. Would you really want to lug the iPad in it's current size around with you all day? 7" would be the perfect size.

Apple would miss out on the opportunity on a huge share of the marget if they forgo the 7" option. With that said, I still think the 10" would sell more, but 7" is still practical for many cases. In fact, I guarentee you a lot of people (on macrumors) would even buy BOTH sizes! haha

I'm one of those who would buy both sizes. A key advantage of the 7" size is that it can be held in one hand... while the other hand touch/types on the screen. You can't do that with the 10" version. Also, the 7" version is necessarily lighter and more portable.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.