New Report Summarizes Display Rumors for Future Apple Devices

[macinit]

get an android then, 5 inch is way too big

that is for damn sure!
Next people are gonna start walking around with a piece of paper glued to their ear...

 

[melendezest]

Obviously, we have completely opposite usage patterns for our iPhones.

How'd I enter info into the web browser? I typed with my thumb. Seriously. One thumb.
Why else would I be talking about the importance of one-handed operation?

It's how I used my iPod. It's how I used my flip phones. It's how I used my flip phones after I got Google Maps, Opera, and my own mail reader on them. It's also how most of the entire country of Japan browsed the web (flip phones with 10-key pads).

As you might have noticed, almost everything I do with the smartphone is while I'm carrying something else.
Telling me one-handed usage is secondary makes about as much sense as telling me cell tower usage is secondary.

Really, the only time it's two handed is when it's a game other than Words with Friends, or on the rare chance I need to send an email that needs to not look like a text message. In those cases, I'm much more likely to pull out my work-provided iPad or laptop if it's available.

Dude, I get it. Of course you used your thumb; that goes without saying. My point is that in all the situations you mention you are carrying something, and as I pointed out before that is one of two scenarios where one handed use is a necessity.

I don't have a problem with the way you use your phone (why would I?). As I said before, there is no right or wrong way to use it. My issue is with Apple, which argues, through their phone design rationale, that most people are like you: always using the phone when carrying something and thus using one-handed operation as a primary method of interaction.

I disagree with this notion. I'm not saying that one-handed use is unnecessary, or irrelevant. I contend it should be secondary, given what a smartphone is capable of doing and how we do it. Combined sales of large screen phones show us that people can and do perform everything you can on a small phone. I simply want Apple to provide that choice, and point out that their small-screen rationale is not valid for everyone, even if it is to you.

For you, one-handed use is the primary form of interaction. I use my phone waay more often when I'm not carrying something. I like to watch movies on it. I like to take notes in meetings with it. I surf the web when waiting at the dentist office or car shop. I play games on it, take pictures, record video of my family. Most, if not all of these activities would benefit from a larger screen and are more comfortable when using two hands to perform operations.

I don't want an Android phone. I want an Apple large-screen phone. I think a lot of people are waiting for one. They jumped at the chance of a larger-screened iPhone once, I'll bet they'll do it again. We'll have to wait and see what Apple does..

 

[elvetio]

...

You have no idea what you are talking about. Otherwise you wouldn't have found the courage to suggest such a stupid strategy. Its exactly the other way around. Apple creates value by concentrating on very few products and variants.

Yes, that's what they've been doing for the past few years. What they are doing now is precisely what i said, more products, larger market share. In the end it will only mean more profit. Future will tell which of us is right

 

[Gudi]

Yes, that's what they've been doing for the past few years. What they are doing now is precisely what i said, more products, larger market share. In the end it will only mean more profit. Future will tell which of us is right.

Whats your evidence for that claim? When they introduced the iPhone 5c they killed the iPhone 5. So we are down to only two variants of iPhones. That is the least bit of diversification possible. Any less and they would sell only one phone. With notebooks they used to have three lines: MacBooks, MacBook Pros and MacBook Airs. Only the latter two survived. And the MacBook Pro line had three variants: 13-inch, 15-inch and 17-inch. Only the former two survived. Back in 2006 the iMac also had three different sizes: 17-inch, 20-inch and 24-inch. Thats also down to two now. 21.5-inch and 27-inch. A bigger one and a smaller one. That is all the diversification Apples strive for simplification allows. Do you think there will be a third iPad size? Think again, its not gonna happen! Only if a product sells in the hundreds of millions they allow it to come in multiple colors. Just to prevent the awkward feeling of everyone having the same iPod, when in fact everyone has the same damn iPod. They didn't diversify with iPhones either. They just make it appear as if there are more different products, when in fact there is only this years model and last years model. Just like it was before.

 

[elvetio]

...

Whats your evidence for that claim? When they introduced the iPhone 5c they killed the iPhone 5. So we are down to only two variants of iPhones. That is the least bit of diversification possible. Any less and they would sell only one phone. With notebooks they used to have three lines: MacBooks, MacBook Pros and MacBook Airs. Only the latter two survived. And the MacBook Pro line had three variants: 13-inch, 15-inch and 17-inch. Only the former two survived. Back in 2006 the iMac also had three different sizes: 17-inch, 20-inch and 24-inch. Thats also down to two now. 21.5-inch and 27-inch. A bigger one and a smaller one. That is all the diversification Apples strive for simplification allows. Do you think there will be a third iPad size? Think again, its not gonna happen! Only if a product sells in the hundreds of millions they allow it to come in multiple colors. Just to prevent the awkward feeling of everyone having the same iPod, when in fact everyone has the same damn iPod. They didn't diversify with iPhones either. They just make it appear as if there are more different products, when in fact there is only this years model and last years model. Just like it was before.

Are you nuts or something? I can't even understand how can someone take this as a personal matter. Calm down..

Mate, diversifying has nothing to do with screen sizes. It's all about different price ranges, and creating products that fit within those limits. This can be done either by offering different color choices, different memory sizes, screen sizes, different camera specs etc etc. This way you can segment your product line in a way that allows you to charge different price points and gain more costumers without loosing any.

For instance, i would never consider buying an iPad if the mini didn't come out. Same thing for macBooks: although they've simplified their product line, with less models and less screen sizes, they've managed to come up with a lot of possibilities when one's considering to buy a notebook. On one extreme they offer a cheap 11'' Air on the other end they provide a super expensive and highly customizable Retina MacBook. With a lot of possibilities in between. iPhone 5? same thing. Instead of offering the usual old model, 2 colors and 1 memory size, they now went for the "new", 5 color, 2 capacity phone. This makes your choice much more diverse and, in the end, you can expect to please a lot more people, gain more costumers and therefore a larger market share. Basic economics. Tim Cook has been very fond of this approach. There's even an article on Time Online about this. Check it out.

In the end what i am saying is nothing but the truth, believe it if you will. That's why i think a larger sized iPad could be possible.

And as a reminder, just chill out. Don't get to personal on these things. Life's has a lot more to it than phones.

Cheers.

 

[hchung]

Dude, I get it. Of course you used your thumb; that goes without saying. My point is that in all the situations you mention you are carrying something, and as I pointed out before that is one of two scenarios where one handed use is a necessity.

I don't have a problem with the way you use your phone (why would I?). As I said before, there is no right or wrong way to use it. My issue is with Apple, which argues, through their phone design rationale, that most people are like you: always using the phone when carrying something and thus using one-handed operation as a primary method of interaction.

I disagree with this notion. I'm not saying that one-handed use is unnecessary, or irrelevant. I contend it should be secondary, given what a smartphone is capable of doing and how we do it. Combined sales of large screen phones show us that people can and do perform everything you can on a small phone. I simply want Apple to provide that choice, and point out that their small-screen rationale is not valid for everyone, even if it is to you.

For you, one-handed use is the primary form of interaction. I use my phone waay more often when I'm not carrying something. I like to watch movies on it. I like to take notes in meetings with it. I surf the web when waiting at the dentist office or car shop. I play games on it, take pictures, record video of my family. Most, if not all of these activities would benefit from a larger screen and are more comfortable when using two hands to perform operations.

I don't want an Android phone. I want an Apple large-screen phone. I think a lot of people are waiting for one. They jumped at the chance of a larger-screened iPhone once, I'll bet they'll do it again. We'll have to wait and see what Apple does..

By the way, sorry if it sounds like I'm railing on ya. It's just that your comments sounded like you believe that one-handed operation is a minority scenerio. It simply isn't. Most people do more than use their phones.

There's also other issues with a size increase. A jeans pocket for an average-sized person isn't cut out for even a 4" iPhone 5, much less a larger one. It's both funny and sad at the same time to see people stuffing these into their pockets and actually bending them when they sit. Phablets sell significantly better in Hong Kong & Europe compared to the rest of the world for one simple reason: men and women both carry purses.

In every one of the operations you mentioned which benefit from a larger screen, I see an iPad. If there's a bump to 5", it's pointless because you might as well go whole hog and jump to 6.5" or 7". I can agree with the idea of having a phone option in the iPad mini, but it certainly would never be considered a flagship iPhone.

 

[Gudi]

Are you nuts or something? Calm down..

I wonder who of us is taking this personal?

Mate, diversifying has nothing to do with screen sizes. It's all about different price ranges, and creating products that fit within those limits.

Nope, diversifying has to do with products being different. Like you said before, it is a strategy to come up with more and more products. Offering different price points is not diversifying, you always want to create different price points to collect the most money from everybody.

A 16 GB iPad and a 64 GB iPad aren't different products. They are used exactly the same way and everyone would choose more storage, if money wouldn't be an issue. These order options just exist, so that people with more money can spend more money. But its still the same device.

The iPad mini on the other hand isn't just a cheaper iPad, its smaller and lighter, more portable and has different use cases. People with unlimited amounts of money might still choose the cheaper iPad mini because it is better for reading epub and holding with one hand. Still you have only two variants of iPads, not much diversity.

This can be done either by offering different color choices, different memory sizes, screen sizes, different camera specs etc etc.

Different color options do not allow for different price points. Blue iPhones are exactly as valuable as green ones. Color is an instrument for individualizing products. To make you feel that it is yours, because you picket your favorite color from the four basic colors pallet. And you can never choose another camera in any Apple product.

This way you can segment your product line in a way that allows you to charge different price points and gain more costumers without loosing any.

This is great, but it is the opposite of diversification. Apple wants to cover the market with as little devices as possible. And they are getting better in covering more with less products. The 15-inch MacBook Pro with Retina Display can be scaled to provide as much screen real-estate as an 17-inch MacBook Pro, rendering that model useless. Reach more people with fewer products. That is and has been Apples strategy since the return of Steve Jobs. And it is now as successful as ever.

This makes your choice much more diverse and, in the end, you can expect to please a lot more people, gain more costumers and therefore a larger market share.

More diverse products, not more products. Sadly that isn't what diversification means in economics. Diversification means to not put all your eggs in one basket, to spread out your technology with lots of different products. Samsung is a perfect example.

When Apple increased the iPhone screen size, they stopped making the old size phones. They changed the basket, but they are still putting alle their eggs into one basket. Taking the risk of not having the right screen size for some parts of the market. Meanwhile Samsung is offering screens of all sizes and sees what sticks.

Basic economics. Tim Cook has been very fond of this approach. There's even an article on Time Online about this. Check it out.

Tim Cook is very fond of all of Apples products fit on one table. Thats not diverse, thats reduction, concentration, focus.

In the end what i am saying is nothing but the truth, believe it if you will. That's why i think a larger sized iPad could be possible.

But not likely. If Apple feels the customers could benefit from an even larger screen, than they will increase the size of the big iPad. Remaining the two sizes strategy.

----------

Phablets sell significantly better in Hong Kong & Europe compared to the rest of the world for one simple reason: men and women both carry purses.

I can't speak for Hong Kong, but men in Europe do not carry Phablets in purses.

 

[toke lahti]

By the way, sorry if it sounds like I'm railing on ya. It's just that your comments sounded like you believe that one-handed operation is a minority scenerio. It simply isn't. Most people do more than use their phones.

Again,
it's very easy to make smaller GUI on larger screen for one-hand operation.
Same thing is done with ipad when you can brake the keyboard to two pieces.

With notebooks they used to have three lines: MacBooks, MacBook Pros and MacBook Airs. Only the latter two survived. And the MacBook Pro line had three variants: 13-inch, 15-inch and 17-inch. Only the former two survived.

And if you just think about laptops in general, Apple has had:
2 sizes in 1999-2000 (12" & 14")
2 sizes in 2001 (12" & 15")
3 sizes in 2002 (12", 14" & 15")
4 sizes in 2003-2005 (12", 14", 15, & 17")
3 sizes in 2006-2009 (13", 15" & 17")
4 sizes in 2010-2011 (11", 13", 15" & 17")
and 3 sizes from 2012 (11", 13", 15").

So in general, 3 sizes has been the norm and the only difference really is that Apple is selling over ten times more laptops now than over a decade ago.
So they could have 10x more exact models than then, but still sell same amount of units than then. Of course nobody's asking for 30 different macbook lines, but there could be few lines more. Less lines is more profits only to certain point. If macbook market is saturated, new lines could make more sales. But this all needs that Apple is still interested in macs, since they produce only 15% of company's revenue.

Unquestionable is that now for the first time, Apple has 2 new iphone lines. It wouldn't be utterly magical, if these lines would diverge a bit more in the future. Lots of people think that different screen sizes would be bigger difference than color, especially when most people do use cases over their phones. Screen is also the most expensive component, so there would also be more price difference, which would probably be good for business.

 

[twoodcc]

what about a 4k iMac?

 

[zgh1999]

If this is the rate of how porducts get developed at Apple under Tim Cook, I think all of Apple's stockholders (shareholders, employees, users) should be very concerned.

Let's not sugar-coat the issue.

What has Tim Cook done at Apple since Jobs' passing?

And don't count putting new colors on an outdated one-year-old phone or painting the flagship phone in gold color as innovation. That is not innovation by any type of standards, and especially not by Apple's standards under Jobs.

All I see Tim Cook do at Apple is to blindly defend the iPhone screen size when people are trying to tell him that the market has already moved on to bigger sized phones, talk to characters like Icahn, and talk about innovating instead of actually innovating.

And just so we are all clear -- having bigger screen size phones is not innovation. If Apple considers catching up to the rest of the industry by giving consumers bigger screen iPhones as innovation and takes a year or two to actually do this -- which I think is the gist of the article -- then we as Apple stakeholders are in for some big trouble ahead.

 

[elvetio]

....

Whats your evidence for that claim? When they introduced the iPhone 5c they killed the iPhone 5. So we are down to only two variants of iPhones. That is the least bit of diversification possible. Any less and they would sell only one phone. With notebooks they used to have three lines: MacBooks, MacBook Pros and MacBook Airs. Only the latter two survived. And the MacBook Pro line had three variants: 13-inch, 15-inch and 17-inch. Only the former two survived. Back in 2006 the iMac also had three different sizes: 17-inch, 20-inch and 24-inch. Thats also down to two now. 21.5-inch and 27-inch. A bigger one and a smaller one. That is all the diversification Apples strive for simplification allows. Do you think there will be a third iPad size? Think again, its not gonna happen! Only if a product sells in the hundreds of millions they allow it to come in multiple colors. Just to prevent the awkward feeling of everyone having the same iPod, when in fact everyone has the same damn iPod. They didn't diversify with iPhones either. They just make it appear as if there are more different products, when in fact there is only this years model and last years model. Just like it was before.

Remember the argument we had a few weeks ago? Now what? Still thinking that there won't be a new iPad size coming out? Even after the "AIR" rebranding? Honestly I think they are pretty much segmenting their product line by keeping old products and introducing new ones. Touching multiple price points and therefore a lot of consumers. The result of all this: increased market share. Seems legit..

 

[Gudi]

Now what? Still thinking that there won't be a new iPad size coming out? Even after the "AIR" rebranding?

More than ever. Apples naming conventions are all over the place (.mac .me .icloud). This used to be iBooks.

The existence of an iPad Air is by no means a hint of an upcoming iPad Pro. And even if there is something by that name, chances are it won't introduce a new screen size or god forbid a new resolution to the iPad line.

Ignore the naming just look at the products, there is a bigger one and a smaller one and two older variants of both of them. The strategy is obvious. A multitude of price points with a duality of products. Two of every kind.

Just like Noah's Arc.

Honestly I think they are pretty much segmenting their product line by keeping old products and introducing new ones. Touching multiple price points and therefore a lot of consumers. The result of all this: increased market share. Seems legit..

Nope, they are explicitly avoiding the need for segmenting their product line by keeping an older version of the same product around for longer than it is good. Apple is not creating new segments to fill the needs of the lower priced markets. They just keep their old fabs running for a little longer. This is the opposite of diversification.

No more products! Two sizes are enough choice for everyone.

 

[danielsutton]

Large MacBook Pro to go, please!

Hello MacRumors peeps! While Apple is busy formulating bigger iPad and iPhone devices, I hope that they are also formulating a bigger MacBook Pro! I have a 17" 2010 model, and I would love, love, love to see the company either re-release a 17" MBP with a higher resolution IGZO display, or perhaps even release a new model with an even larger display! I would like to see a 20" or 21" MacBook Pro with an ultra-high resolution display. How many of you are with me on this one?