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.
Rumors of a 7.85-Inch 'iPad Mini' Revived (Again) for Late 2012
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Ummm... 7.85 would make all the standard UI elements the same size as the iPhone, so no harder to read or tap than iPhone.
Everything on the current iPad is a tad bigger in screen area terms.
My biggest question is what happens to the 9.7 model (in hopefully larger models)?
I dunno. The current size is perfect for typing and web surfing with. The iphone and ipod touch are perfect for the pocket.
A smaller ipad wouldnt be on my list...but i could see how some would like it.
I plan to get the ipad 3 when it comes out in March.
If a smaller ipad comes out late next year, i will check it out...but I am confident I won't be buying one. (famous last words!)
But honestly...I wouldn't have a need for one.
A smaller ipad wouldnt be on my list...but i could see how some would like it.
I plan to get the ipad 3 when it comes out in March.
If a smaller ipad comes out late next year, i will check it out...but I am confident I won't be buying one. (famous last words!)
But honestly...I wouldn't have a need for one.
Smaller tablets have been totally ignored until the Kindle Fire came along...and the Fire is a huge hit....
... but... um, it's a hit and a success in the 7" category because it's... oh, $199!
The smaller Galaxy Tab is no threat (not the larger 10.1 Samsung is crying about <hello, no one wants your tablet anyway>). It's price... coo coo! And so would a smaller iPads be.
When Steve Jobs claimed they'd never do a 7 incher, I chalked it up to all the other things he said never to (only to do them as little as weeks later in some cases), so I don't doubt this has been in the pipe and isn't do doubt it's in response to any competitive threat. (Digi Times is worthless, but this one's been out there for awhile from more credible sources.)
Sell any tablet with a decent spec set under the hood for $199, and yes, people will buy it. Does anyone see Apple selling a smaller iPad for $199? (Maybe if you are a meth addict, but your opinion doesn't count.) They'd probably do a Samsung and knock $50 off the 10" price and call it a day. Few people are going to see value in saving $50 for a smaller screen when it's on display side by side with the 10".
While I stick to my guns that that 7-8" size is a commercial failure when not priced so low ala The Fire... there are "some" people who would like that size. I guess it's better to snag the minority than give them and an echo system or purchasing away to a competitor. It still wouldn't be a competitor to the Kindle Fire though. I also think Apple is perfectly fine without it.
... but... um, it's a hit and a success in the 7" category because it's... oh, $199!
The smaller Galaxy Tab is no threat (not the larger 10.1 Samsung is crying about <hello, no one wants your tablet anyway>). It's price... coo coo! And so would a smaller iPads be.
When Steve Jobs claimed they'd never do a 7 incher, I chalked it up to all the other things he said never to (only to do them as little as weeks later in some cases), so I don't doubt this has been in the pipe and isn't do doubt it's in response to any competitive threat. (Digi Times is worthless, but this one's been out there for awhile from more credible sources.)
Sell any tablet with a decent spec set under the hood for $199, and yes, people will buy it. Does anyone see Apple selling a smaller iPad for $199? (Maybe if you are a meth addict, but your opinion doesn't count.) They'd probably do a Samsung and knock $50 off the 10" price and call it a day. Few people are going to see value in saving $50 for a smaller screen when it's on display side by side with the 10".
While I stick to my guns that that 7-8" size is a commercial failure when not priced so low ala The Fire... there are "some" people who would like that size. I guess it's better to snag the minority than give them and an echo system or purchasing away to a competitor. It still wouldn't be a competitor to the Kindle Fire though. I also think Apple is perfectly fine without it.
I don't buy it for the simple reason that Apple has a history of offering the prior generation device at a cheaper price point to address any gap (i.e. iPhone 4s v. 4; iPad 2 v. original iPad).
I think the "ipod mini" rumors are just that, rumors. Maybe there are some prototypes in a lab somewhere.
The reason is that 7" is not that different from 10"
However what I think might be possible is a "iBook reader" version of the iPad which is around the size of a A6 page (to accommodate Manga, Comics and books without having to scroll the page.) These can still do everything the iPad can do, but would be targeted at the Asian market, but available everywhere.
The 10" model in turn will get the double-resolution screen.
But I'm just speculating based on trends that people complain about. Americans think 7" is too small, Asians find it too big, children find it too large to hold, etc. Look at redesigns in the original Xbox controller and the Nintendo DSi/XL.
There's nothing really preventing Apple from selling both sizes. But the largest complaint about wanting a 7" model is because it can fit in a pocket, where as the 10" can't.
The reason is that 7" is not that different from 10"
However what I think might be possible is a "iBook reader" version of the iPad which is around the size of a A6 page (to accommodate Manga, Comics and books without having to scroll the page.) These can still do everything the iPad can do, but would be targeted at the Asian market, but available everywhere.
The 10" model in turn will get the double-resolution screen.
But I'm just speculating based on trends that people complain about. Americans think 7" is too small, Asians find it too big, children find it too large to hold, etc. Look at redesigns in the original Xbox controller and the Nintendo DSi/XL.
There's nothing really preventing Apple from selling both sizes. But the largest complaint about wanting a 7" model is because it can fit in a pocket, where as the 10" can't.
I like it!
It's all in the calculation of what a retina display is...
If they create a 2048x1536 pixel resolution at 7.85" - that's a 326 ppi (same as iPhone 4)
If they create a 2048x1536 pixel resolution at 9.6" - that's something less that 300ppi, and not retina... The biggest they can create and call it retina is 8.5" - which will give them 300ppi - the same as what a new iPhone would be.
My money is on a new iPhone and new iPad each with 300ppi in the first quarter. That means iPhones with bigger screens and iPads with smaller...
It's all in the calculation of what a retina display is...
If they create a 2048x1536 pixel resolution at 7.85" - that's a 326 ppi (same as iPhone 4)
If they create a 2048x1536 pixel resolution at 9.6" - that's something less that 300ppi, and not retina... The biggest they can create and call it retina is 8.5" - which will give them 300ppi - the same as what a new iPhone would be.
My money is on a new iPhone and new iPad each with 300ppi in the first quarter. That means iPhones with bigger screens and iPads with smaller...
Number of Kindle Fire reviews have mentioned the usability pitfalls due to the "big fingers syndrome" on a 7" screen, confirming Steve Jobs' sandpaper-joke.
It's not clear for me whether those problems are specifically linked to the Kindle Fire or any 7" tablet though.
So, I'm not buying at all into that rumor.
It's not clear for me whether those problems are specifically linked to the Kindle Fire or any 7" tablet though.
So, I'm not buying at all into that rumor.
If that was the case... you should be able to buy an iPad 1 today for $399 or less.
They did sell the iPad 1 for a little while after the iPad 2 came out...
But now... it seems they only want to sell the higher-margin iPad 2.
Correct, every single smaller tablet has failed. The Kindle product line up until now has been largely successful because it's a pure play device: an e-book reader.
In six months, we will see if the Kindle Fire has a real audience beyond readers of e-books.
It is worthwhile to note that after the initial wave of popularity, small netbooks (7-9" screen sizes) also failed despite their lower entry level price. This isn't really a pundit's decision opportunity: the worldwide consumer marketplace decides these sort of things.
It is still highly questionable whether a device with a 7" screen has much use beyond e-book reading.
Personally, having played around with a few sheet music apps lately, I feel a greater need for a *bigger* iPad. Wouldn't be as portable, and wouldn't be hand-held, but there's definitely a niche. Does Apple want it? Dunno. Same with the 7 inch, really.
But in due course, they can add different sizes. Developers will just have to deal with it. And they will.
But in due course, they can add different sizes. Developers will just have to deal with it. And they will.
What I would like to see is a bit larger iPod Touch/iPhone with a larger screen like some of the HTC phones I have played with, but not too big that I can't slip it into a shirt pocket. A 7.85" iPad to me would not have any advantages over the current model. A number of people I know that have both iPod Touches/iPhones and iPads tell me they tend to leave the iPad at home because it does not slip into any convenient pocket, a 7.85" iPad would not be any better. As long as the 10" model is flying out the door at warp 9.5 it just don't see a smaller model.
Keep them guessing...
So many prototypes... so little time...
They hear a spook whisper about another prototype that he might have seen in a sealed box marked... X
So many prototypes... so little time...
They hear a spook whisper about another prototype that he might have seen in a sealed box marked... X
Since they decided to follow Android with this:
* dual core chips
* 3G phones
* 4G phones
* NFC (coming)
* larger phone screens (coming)
* smaller screens for tablets (coming)
----------
Nobody is buying Kindle Fire for book reading
actually it would hurt apple, because different sizes means different resolutions, which mean more work for developers.
Apple treasures its developers and they're smart on doing so, they give them enough time to work on things and by having less "resolutions" to work on they don't have to bust their butts off, and because of that apps are better and therefore iDevices are better.
i know that many of us don't think about all the problems that a bunch of different products would create but if you bought an android and half of the apps crash you would realize how great is not to have to worry about which apps works and which don't.
I'm not sure if this is a joke, but what you just listed is hardware and has nothing to do with the OS of the phone. Hardware is always evolving and most of it is not researched/made by the phone manufacturers themselves.
Phones running Android have been having the lead on that kind of things mainly because a new phone is released around every week, because they have different price segments (lower and higher end phones) and because they have to make hardware features selling points given the amount of competing manufacturers offering phones with the same software.
Anybody could predict that quad-core and 5G phones are coming someday. You're not a genius for putting them on the market slightly before the others. They're just numbers and don't change the concept of a phone.
Add a full width screen to the iPhone 5 and a tablet of this size becomes more and more redundant.
I do not plan on upgrading my iPad 2 for an iPad 3. However, if they release a smaller form factor iPad 3, I would buy that.
And Gizmodo did a short little post saying that the Kindle Fire is the iPad's first real competition. I agree and disagree. I agree in the sense that they are selling more than any other non-iPad tablet. I disagree in the sense that the Fire and iPad are aimed at two different markets and thus not really in the same "league." In my opinion, the iPad and most other tablets are aimed for the more power tablet users.
And Gizmodo did a short little post saying that the Kindle Fire is the iPad's first real competition. I agree and disagree. I agree in the sense that they are selling more than any other non-iPad tablet. I disagree in the sense that the Fire and iPad are aimed at two different markets and thus not really in the same "league." In my opinion, the iPad and most other tablets are aimed for the more power tablet users.
Dual Core chips is simply the natural evolution of technology. It's not like the public at large where screaming: "We want dual core chips" or anything, just that the price/production-capacity reached a poitn where it simply made more sense going for these rather than the singel core chips. And guess what, in a few years there will be even more cores, and it has nothing to do with trends.
Your next three points are mobile standards and has again very little to do with trends or Android specifically.
The last two might be considered trends, and Apple has still to make a move to follow these trends...