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.
"Monster" iPad.
- Thread starter TrentS
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
TwinCities Dan
macrumors 603
GoCubsGo
macrumors Nehalem
GoCubsGo
macrumors Nehalem
Gathomblipoob
macrumors 603
MacSA
macrumors 68000
GoCubsGo
macrumors Nehalem
I don't know how much truth there is to that rumour, but a larger iPad would make certain creative disciplines more viable on it. Painting, CAD & 3D come to mind and would be infinitely more doable on a larger touch screen.
Ergonomically, while a large touch screen doesn't work well at a 90 degree angle, it may well be viable at something more gradual which the user hunches over as they might a draftsman's board.
Ergonomically, while a large touch screen doesn't work well at a 90 degree angle, it may well be viable at something more gradual which the user hunches over as they might a draftsman's board.
Last edited:
Back in the real world, back OT, and back to being serious, I would like to see an "iPad HD", and by that I mean a 16:9 screen with the same vertical (landscape) height as the current 4:3 iPad, yet a little longer (wider in landscape mode). Then, HD video would finally make sense on the iPad.
Of course that presents problems for legacy apps, but they could run as 4:3 just fine until upgraded, or never upgraded, dealer's choice. It might even create a niche for true 16:9 HD apps (although everyone already mistakenly labels their 4:3 app HD which bugs the hell out of me).
Since the iTunes store is converting to HD shows, I could see that as a complementary move for Apple; more HD shows, more 16:9 iPads sold. More 16:9 iPads, more HD shows sold.
I would also like to see a Kindle Fire-sized iPad, which would be great for meetings at work.
But my real wish is for a "bezel-less" iPad (and MBA). IOW, edge to edge screen with no black surround. I understand that the black (or white) bezel is also functional, but only when it is being held; in a stand, its not functional at all.
They could also make it dynamic. BY that, I mean that when you grab it, wherever your thumb ends up, whichever edge, is the edge that the active video area automatically shrinks away from. Now you have more real estate for the active screen area, full functionality (IOW you still have room for your thumb without obscuring the video area or scuttling the touch functions), and full screen area when using a stand; the best of all worlds.
When that becomes the norm for iPad 6 and iOS 8, I will be the one that told you so 🙂.
Of course that presents problems for legacy apps, but they could run as 4:3 just fine until upgraded, or never upgraded, dealer's choice. It might even create a niche for true 16:9 HD apps (although everyone already mistakenly labels their 4:3 app HD which bugs the hell out of me).
Since the iTunes store is converting to HD shows, I could see that as a complementary move for Apple; more HD shows, more 16:9 iPads sold. More 16:9 iPads, more HD shows sold.
I would also like to see a Kindle Fire-sized iPad, which would be great for meetings at work.
But my real wish is for a "bezel-less" iPad (and MBA). IOW, edge to edge screen with no black surround. I understand that the black (or white) bezel is also functional, but only when it is being held; in a stand, its not functional at all.
They could also make it dynamic. BY that, I mean that when you grab it, wherever your thumb ends up, whichever edge, is the edge that the active video area automatically shrinks away from. Now you have more real estate for the active screen area, full functionality (IOW you still have room for your thumb without obscuring the video area or scuttling the touch functions), and full screen area when using a stand; the best of all worlds.
When that becomes the norm for iPad 6 and iOS 8, I will be the one that told you so 🙂.
TheWheelMan
macrumors 6502a
The 16:9 aspect ratio in NO WAY denotes HD. It represents widescreen mode. The iPad and anything else with a high enough pixel count can be considered HD.
Roy G Biv
macrumors 6502
Conversely, however, HD connotes widescreen by affiliation with modern home video. Hence, iPad HD is a plausible shorthand for a 16:9 iPad. Now apologize!
TheWheelMan
macrumors 6502a
Why? I didn't say anything about naming a potential HD iPad. What I said is absolutely true, and you implied the exact opposite, that it can't be HD unless it's 16:9, which is completely wrong. I don't care what they name the thing if they ever make it. The current aspect ratio is the one I prefer.
What's with the irregardelss posts? (and the guy actually edited his post)
Have you all lost it, is that it? 😀
Have you all lost it, is that it? 😀
Last edited:
Roy G Biv
macrumors 6502
No, I connoted the converse. It is indeed wrong, but it is not my own. Now apologize.
TheWheelMan
macrumors 6502a
Geekbabe
macrumors 6502a
If they released something I would really like to see something like Microsofts Surface.
I've play with the Microsoft Surface it is pretty amazing, I can certainly think of many working situations where a table top size iPad would be useful.
Definitely interesting but i think the ergonmic issues would need to be thought through. It would probably require 2 handed control and many people are not used to that (or may find that difficult). Single handed operation would translate into a lot of 'hand travel'....
It would look pretty good though ..
jmgregory1
macrumors 68040
Sitting at my desk now, my neck remains relatively aligned with my back. When I try to look down at my desktop (my desk, not desktop on my Air), I just can't see doing this for hours at a time. I can see a large touch screen, or maybe a non-touch but 3D motion controlled (ala Kinect) screen as the next wave of computing. It wouldn't be type friendly, but that is probably why Apple is pushing the siri interface. I love standing while working and would ideally like to find a way to be able to type while standing (not holding an iPad).