Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Second Source Claims Apple Will Launch 10.5-inch iPad in 2017

10.5 inch. That'll make for some interesting decisions. I love the 9.7" pro, but it feels too small to really make good use of the pencil. I've wanted to get something bigger. I haven't played with the 12.9" much, but it almost looks too big and awkward to carry around. I wonder if this mama-bear size will hit the right balance, or if the 12.9" is really what I'm going to want in the end.
 
kdarling said:
That argument is only valid if a company is seen to be naturally progressing to every size.

It does not work, though, if a company first declares that those other screen sizes are useless, and/or claims that their own picked sizes are the only ones that make sense. Yet is later forced to add such sizes to stop losing sales.
  • "There are clear limits of how close you can physically place elements on a touch screen before users cannot reliably tap, flick or pinch them. This is one of the key reasons we think the 10-inch screen size is the minimum size required to create great tablet apps."
    - Steve Jobs dissing smaller than 10" tablets, Apple quarterly earnings call, 2010, before iPad mini
  • "We've put a lot of thinking into screen size and we think we've picked the right one."
    - Tim Cook on 4" iPhone, dissing larger displays of competitors, Quarterly call, Jan 2013, before iPhone 6
Click to expand...

That bears zero relevance to the point I was making, which was a screen size can't be copied.

What you're saying is the dudes at Apple said something wrong.

And TBH I still firmly believe the 4" sized devices are better than these huge things were lugging around these days.
 
ColdShadow said:
Pro in iPad is just a model name.
iPad Pro 9.7 was the successor to iPad Air 2.
so from now on, all iPads are "Pro".(rumours are no Mini update).
Click to expand...
"pro" stand for a feature set. A 10.5" and 9.7" ipads with same size and feature set make the 9.7 one irrelevant.
The 9.7 is relevant if it has a different feature set.
 
MacsRgr8 said:
I wonder if the stay @ 4:3 or go with 16:9
16:9 is easier on developers as the iPhone uses this format.
Click to expand...

But completely different use cases, and Apple doesn't really have a habit of making things easy for the developers.

Personally for me, 4:3 is still the best. Video watching is only one of many things I do on an iPad, and for many other tasks, I appreciate the extra vertical screen space afforded by the iPad.
 
Jsameds said:
In 2010, with the technology available at the time, yes. In the time since we've had drastic reductions in weight and size of the device itself.

A 9.7" iPad in 2010 weighed 730g (3G model) vs the 2016 model that weighs 444g, that's 40% lighter. A larger iPad in 2010 would have been an absolute brick of a device and far too heavy to use.
Click to expand...

joeblow7777 said:
To be fair, launch was several years ago. Things change. Ask Blackberry what happens when you don't keep up.
Click to expand...

I thought they meant it was the perfect size from a usability perspective, then again, they said the 3.5inch screen was the best and made fun of that your thumb can't reach the whole screen and now we have the iphone plus
 
MacBH928 said:
I thought they meant it was the perfect size from a usability perspective, then again, they said the 3.5inch screen was the best and made fun of that your thumb can't reach the whole screen and now we have the iphone plus
Click to expand...

I know, and the plus models are still stupidly big. Even the 4.7" phones are too large.

Jobs was right.
 
I for one look forward to the iPad LC , iPad Centris, iPad Performa and iPad Quadra :D P.S, the LC and Quadra are differentiated by the included Apps. Oh and the iPad Iivx, which is the one they cripple cause it could hurt the Quadra or the Centris sales.
 
MacBH928 said:
I thought they meant it was the perfect size from a usability perspective, then again, they said the 3.5inch screen was the best and made fun of that your thumb can't reach the whole screen and now we have the iphone plus
Click to expand...

I think they did mean from a usability perspective, but as you point out with phone size, people's usage changes. With phones, having more screen space has become more important than easy one-handed use for many/most users.
 
Jsameds said:
I know, and the plus models are still stupidly big. Even the 4.7" phones are too large.

Jobs was right.
Click to expand...

It seems that most people would disagree.
[doublepost=1480075758][/doublepost]
zhenya said:
That happens and I'm done with the iPad. 16:9 is a horrible aspect ratio for tablets.
Click to expand...

4:3 is better for tablets. If they go 16:9, the iPad really will be just a big iPhone.
 
joeblow7777 said:
It seems that most people would disagree.
Click to expand...

Self for fulling prophecy. Most phones are 4.7"+ so most phones sold are 4.7"+, and now they're making people uptrade the size of the phone by teasing better features on the larger model.

If there was a 4" flagship released every year alongside 4.7 and 5.5 then we'd be able to see how many people want what.

Anyway, that's not really the point. For me, the size of the screen isn't really the issue - it's the size of the device itself. The 5S was the perfect size. If they could fit a 4.7" display into something close to the size of a 5S with flagship specs I'd get it in a heartbeat.
 
Look at the other 2 sizes... Would it not make more sense to release a 10.8" iPad? I think so.
[doublepost=1480087058][/doublepost]...Actually, what is it with the 7.9, 9.7, 10.5, 12.9 crap? Mfgs can now make any size screen with any pixel density. So, how about scraping the entire current line (and silly names), and release a whole new generation in "bezel free" 9, 11, and 13" sizes, each with the presumed "A10X" processor. Call them all simply iPads. Done.

A 4:3 aspect ratio is still best for a tablet, however 16:10 would not be terrible. I hope they NEVER go to 16:9. A tablet is not a TV.
 
I7guy said:
Right and a year later the 6 was released. Obviously a smoke screen, rather than a true statement of fact. Or they were for it before they were against it; not specifically Apple.
Click to expand...

More like almost two years (year and nine months) later.

People have this fantasy that Apple spends years developing a product. From the trials, we know that quite often the opposite is true: that a major decision will be made nearly at the last moment. This is why Apple keeps saying they need an agile factory group, to keep up with all these last minute changes.

In the case of display sizes and Tim Cook's statement, We know from trial evidence that at the time he made his (4" is the right size) comment in Jan 2013, Apple was only beginning to internally admit that bigger sizes were selling better.

apple_2014_plan3.png


Not to mention that back in 2010, when addressing AntennaGate, Jobs specifically dissed bigger phones. He said that you could avoid problems by making phones so big "you can't get your hand around it", but that "no one's going to buy that." Then he derogatorily called phablets "Hummers".

The sheer fact is, Apple originally had no plans to make a larger display. They copied other makers when it became obvious how wrong they were.

Jsameds said:
That bears zero relevance to the point I was making, which was a screen size can't be copied.
Click to expand...

As far as larger or smaller, sure it can. Apple claimed there was no other size that made sense. Then after losing sales to Samsung and others, they copied the larger displays that others were doing, and made huge profits from doing so.

Ditto for making smaller tablet sizes. Jobs said nothing smaller than about 10" was usable. Then an Apple exec used a 7" Samsung tablet. and convinced the company to make the iPad mini.

7-inch-cue.png


And that's okay, because there's nothing wrong with choosing to add a feature that belongs to nobody... size, color, shape, price or whatever. That's what competition is all about. If a competitor is selling a new flavor in a different box shape, everyone else will too.

And TBH I still firmly believe the 4" sized devices are better than these huge things were lugging around these days.
Click to expand...

You're apparently not alone. Plus a lot of people would love a larger display in a smaller carry case. I think that's where foldable/expandable phones will shine in the future.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: jlo1158 and RedOrchestra
kdarling said:
More like almost two years (year and nine months) later.

People have this fantasy that Apple spends years developing a product. From the trials, we know that quite often the opposite is true: that a major decision will be made nearly at the last moment. This is why Apple keeps saying they need an agile factory group, to keep up with all these last minute changes.

In the case of display sizes and Tim Cook's statement, We know from trial evidence that at the time he made his (4" is the right size) comment in Jan 2013, Apple was only beginning to internally admit that bigger sizes were selling better.

View attachment 674651

Not to mention that back in 2010, when addressing AntennaGate, Jobs specifically dissed bigger phones. He said that you could avoid problems by making phones so big "you can't get your hand around it", but that "no one's going to buy that." Then he derogatorily called phablets "Hummers".

The sheer fact is, Apple originally had no plans to make a larger display. They copied other makers when it became obvious how wrong they were.



As far as larger or smaller, sure it can. Apple claimed there was no other size that made sense. Then after losing sales to Samsung and others, they copied the larger displays that others were doing, and made huge profits from doing so.

Ditto for making smaller tablet sizes. Jobs said nothing smaller than about 10" was usable. Then an Apple exec used a 7" Samsung tablet. and convinced the company to make the iPad mini.

View attachment 674656

And that's okay, because there's nothing wrong with choosing to add a feature that belongs to nobody... size, color, shape, price or whatever. That's what competition is all about. If a competitor is selling a new flavor in a different box shape, everyone else will too.



You're apparently not alone. Plus a lot of people would love a larger display in a smaller carry case. I think that's where foldable/expandable phones will shine in the future.
Click to expand...
I don't see how it is possible to get the fab going to produce and design chipsets on a dime. It may not take 5 years, but it sure as heck doesn't happen in 5 months. Agile may help with the decision making, but can't help with the lag involved in producing a product.
 
Rob_2811 said:
I'm sorry but this is so misinformed it's unreal.

I use a 5k iMac with a quad core i7 on a daily basis, under any kind of load the fans kick in heavily. That tells you all you need to know about the cooling requirements of those machines.

You can't just shove Xeon processors and potentially dual Fire Pro GPUs into that thin iMac chassis and think it will be able to cool itself effectively.

Honestly comparisons between Arm based iPhone chips and x86 Mac processors are just complete pie in the sky. Faster in geekbench performance which has little relation to real world usage, as for more advanced? Erm no.

The Mac Pro is likely dead, doesn't mean that the iMac is a viable replacement just another example of Apple dumbing down the Mac.
Click to expand...

If Apple can put the kind of computing power they did in a little trash can (Mac Pro) why can't they put something close to it in something as large as an Imac? They can make it thicker if they want to.
 
M. Gustave said:
- iOS is crippled
- Apple is neglecting Macs/"Pros"
- The lineup is fragmented
- Tim's gotta go

Did I miss any? Macrumors is hilarious.
Click to expand...

Don't forget "The iPad is dead." Even though the iPad has expanded in great lengths and is the best tablet on the market.
 
melendezest said:
Why is that exactly? I mean, seriously, what makes a traditional personal computer different from the iPad? The answers lie exactly there.



I agree 100%. I started with Windows, went Mac for 15 years, and it looks like I'm going back to Windows or maybe Linux, sadly, because of Apple.



Right. The issue is, the iPad is powerful. Could be even more so. And the Mac has already become superfluous in many of those use cases. The Mac is dying. But iOS is stuck in the past.



But a Pro would need all those things. The infrastructure for delivering Pro Apps is already there. The horsepower and hardware are (very close to) already there. A computer without local storage access is not a computer. Apple needs to put that in there for those that need it, even if you or most consumers don't.



Agreed, but the issue is that the only one limiting the iPad's capabilities is Apple itself. Again, they don't know what they have.
Click to expand...

I agree 100 percent. I wrote this the other day and pretty much sums it all up.

https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/why-i-am-now-a-proud-owner-of-a-surface-pro.2015071/
 
Firelock said:
I'm assuming that the rumored 10.x" iPad Pro would replace the 9.7" version. I agree that it does not make much sense to have both sizes.
Click to expand...

Jeez I hope - I thought the same about the 9.7" Pro in the first place, though!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back