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

Steve Jobs Criticizes 7-Inch Tablets, Says 10-Inches Minimum

skunnykart said:
Then Steve should have said: "we will not do a 7 inch because there is no $200 budget market right now"

But in reality Steve said: "7 inch is too small"
Click to expand...

Maybe, but I don't think he knew Amazon would successfully create a budget tablet market by 2012 and and that the pricepoint of that market would be exactly $200 and that he'd have to cut the screen size to hit that pricepoint. You can't react to the future in the past

Why can't you just simply admit that Steve was wrong or Steve was talking BS just to sell more iPads at the time.
Click to expand...

Stuff I'll admit he was wrong about - that ugly mouse, skipping over CD burners, the iphone 4 antenna, ping, ios gaming killing consoles, and that commoditized mess of crappy software called the app store. Something I don't think he's wrong about - not shrinking a screen in 2010 and creating a second product line when there was no need to do so.
 
Liquorpuki said:
Something I don't think he's wrong about - not shrinking a screen in 2010 and creating a second product line when there was no need to do so.
Click to expand...

Ok - but there's a difference between not needing to and "Commenting on avalanche of tablets heading to market. Just a handful of credible entrants. Almost all use 7" screen, compared to iPad at nearly 10" screen. 7" screen is only 45% as large as iPad's screen. Hold an iPad in portrait view and draw a horizontal line halfway down. What's left is a 7" screen...too small. There are clear limits to how close elements can be on the screen before users can't touch accurately. We believe 10-inch screen is minimum necessary."

That's spin. And I'm sure you know that. 10" wasn't a minimum necessary for a tablet. Apple just didn't want to enter that market because it didn't believe it had any competition. Once they did/do - suddenly it makes sense. I don't begrudge Apple for changing their mind. It's important to listen to the marketplace. But whether it's now or back in 2010 - the "excuse" that 7" is too small is B.S.
 
Liquorpuki said:
Stuff I'll admit he was wrong about - that ugly mouse, skipping over CD burners, the iphone 4 antenna, ping, ios gaming killing consoles, and that commoditized mess of crappy software called the app store. Something I don't think he's wrong about - not shrinking a screen in 2010 and creating a second product line when there was no need to do so.
Click to expand...
But that's not what Steve said. Steve didn't say it was not finanically feasible for them to make a smaller tablet at that time he said a smaller tablet wouldn't work therefore they wouldn't make one. Just like he said no one wants a flash-based MP3 player, no one wants to watch video on an iPod or iPhone sized device and no one reads anymore. All of which happened prior to him trotting out flash-based MP3 players, iPods/iPhones that played video and the iPad as an awesome eReader. At least with the iPad he was gracious enough to give props to Amazon and the Kindle.
 
samcraig said:
Funny thing happened on the way to the marketplace. Amazon and Google both brought out tablets that were economical and apps that most would argue work just fine at 7"
Click to expand...

Sure, but neither are technically running the tablet version of Android. Amazon designed a propriatary interface for the Kindle, while Google themselves opted for their phone/PMP style interface.

I'm not saying Jobs never exagerated or lied to make Apple's products look better, but in this case Apple's competitors seem to at least partially agree with him.
 
Liquorpuki said:
Maybe, but I don't think he knew Amazon would successfully create a budget tablet market by 2012 and and that the pricepoint of that market would be exactly $200 and that he'd have to cut the screen size to hit that pricepoint. You can't react to the future in the past
Click to expand...

OMG. The guy said 7 inch is too small! NOT there is no market for it.

Can we settle on this then: Steve thought 10 inch should be minimum but in 2012, because there is money to be made, Apple will sell a 7 inch tablet despite Steve in the past saying that 7 inch is too small. In the end, Apple will make whatever that will make money. No vision, no plan, just a single minded effort towards profit, just like every other corporation on earth.
 
AppleScruff1 said:
They weren't dominant in the tablet market before they sold the iPad so how wold they have drawn customers away from their more profitable market?
Click to expand...

I don't know how to answer this because I have no clue what you're asking

samcraig said:
Ok - but there's a difference between not needing to and "Commenting on avalanche of tablets heading to market. Just a handful of credible entrants. Almost all use 7" screen, compared to iPad at nearly 10" screen. 7" screen is only 45% as large as iPad's screen. Hold an iPad in portrait view and draw a horizontal line halfway down. What's left is a 7" screen...too small. There are clear limits to how close elements can be on the screen before users can't touch accurately. We believe 10-inch screen is minimum necessary.
Click to expand...

LethalWolfe said:
But that's not what Steve said. Steve didn't say it was not finanically feasible for them to make a smaller tablet at that time he said a smaller tablet wouldn't work therefore they wouldn't make one. Just like he said no one wants a flash-based MP3 player, no one wants to watch video on an iPod or iPhone sized device and no one reads anymore. All of which happened prior to him trotting out flash-based MP3 players, iPods/iPhones that played video and the iPad as an awesome eReader. At least with the iPad he was gracious enough to give props to Amazon and the Kindle.
Click to expand...

I get what you guys saying and yeah Job has BS'd and been wrong a lot in the past. I admire the guy but don't idolize him so I got no problem saying that

But this 2 year old thread was bumped because the mini is about to drop and some poster thinks the mini contradicts what Jobs said in 2010. I replied the mini is geared toward a budget market that didn't exist in 2010 so you can't apply what Jobs said in 2010 to this device. I'm not defending whatever BS tech reasons he gave. I'm saying it doesn't apply to the mini
 
Exactly. 7" tablets are too small (especially in a non 4:3 aspect).

The iPad mini is rumored to be 7.89 inches (nearly 8") and will be 4:3 aspect. The iPad mini is NOT a 7" tablet.

BIG difference there.
 
Blue Fox said:
Exactly. 7" tablets are too small (especially in a non 4:3 aspect).

The iPad mini is rumored to be 7.89 inches (nearly 8") and will be 4:3 aspect. The iPad mini is NOT a 7" tablet.

BIG difference there.
Click to expand...

A little over three quarters of an inch is the difference between a crappy device and true innovation, people.

I could make a tasteless joke here, but I ain't gonna. Low hanging fruit and all that. Oh, and speaking of low hanging...*bum dum tshhh*

Remember, Steve Jobs said 7" tablets were crap. Technically, he's right.
 
skunnykart said:
OMG. The guy said 7 inch is too small! NOT there is no market for it.

Can we settle on this then: Steve thought 10 inch should be minimum but in 2012, because there is money to be made, Apple will sell a 7 inch tablet despite Steve in the past saying that 7 inch is too small. In the end, Apple will make whatever that will make money. No vision, no plan, just a single minded effort towards profit, just like every other corporation on earth.
Click to expand...

Fine with me. I don't care about any of these tablets anyway except the Surface

And I'm the one who brought up there not being a market because I was responding to the other guy. You then quoted me and flipped what I was saying about the mini's market not existing in 2010 to it being about what Jobs literally said. Next time you're gonna quote me, don't change my context
 
Blue Fox said:
Exactly. 7" tablets are too small (especially in a non 4:3 aspect).

The iPad mini is rumored to be 7.89 inches (nearly 8") and will be 4:3 aspect. The iPad mini is NOT a 7" tablet.

BIG difference there.
Click to expand...

Ah, but Steve's point wasn't about a 7" tablet. It was essentially defining 10" as a minimum.
 
the problem is, jobs is already dead and so his perceptions and ideas. so now, apple can do whatever they want today to stay alive in the competition and that... to shrug off job's ideas and make an ipad mini.
 
Liquorpuki said:
Fine with me. I don't care about any of these tablets anyway except the Surface

And I'm the one who brought up there not being a market because I was responding to the other guy. You then quoted me and flipped what I was saying about the mini's market not existing in 2010 to it being about what Jobs literally said. Next time you're gonna quote me, don't change my context
Click to expand...

I am not going ask you to read through our short exchange of words because if you didn't get it the first time, you probably won't the second time. Ironically, understanding the "context" may be your weakness, not mine.

The topic/title of this thread is: "Steve Jobs Criticizes 7-inch tablets. Says 10 inch is minimum".
 
Blue Fox said:
Exactly. 7" tablets are too small (especially in a non 4:3 aspect).

The iPad mini is rumored to be 7.89 inches (nearly 8") and will be 4:3 aspect. The iPad mini is NOT a 7" tablet.

BIG difference there.
Click to expand...

Only on a Apple forum. Here, I'll carry it further. Since it's nearly 8", and 8" is close to 9", and once you're at 9" it's only a little more to 10". So in reality, the mini iPad is the same size as the original, it's a 10" tablet.
 
skunnykart said:
I am not going ask you to read through our short exchange of words because if you didn't get it the first time, you probably won't the second time. Ironically, understanding the "context" may be your weakness, not mine.

The topic/title of this thread is: "Steve Jobs Criticizes 7-inch tablets. Says 10 inch is minimum".
Click to expand...

This thread is from 2010 and it's reasonable to assume it was bumped because the mini comes out soon. All I said was the whole claim about 7 inches being too small doesn't apply to the mini because the mini serves a market that did not exist back then. That's the context of my reply. I'm not arguing whether Jobs' reason had any truth to it, which is what you keep refuting me with. Understand now?

----------
AppleScruff1 said:
Reread what you posted and you will see what I was replying to.
Click to expand...

I know what you replied to. I just don't know what you're asking because your question doesn't make sense
 
Technarchy said:
The iPad Mini, if rumor is true, is not a 7" tablet
Click to expand...

Since Jobs said anything smaller than 10" isn't worth it (paraphrasing) - then it doesn't matter if it's 7" or 8".

Technarchy - can't you just admit that Jobs said what he said because he was bashing the competition as inferior and elevating his own product based on spin? That won't revoke your Apple fan license - I promise.
 
Well, this sure has been a fun thread to read!

This sort of situation has happened countless times before in history, and has been well studied since the mid 1950's: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/When_Prophecy_Fails

It will be interesting to see what happens after Tuesday -- Hopefully the headlines won't read: "Emergency Room Visits Soar as Fanatical Believers in the WORD OF JOBS Sand Fingers Down to 1/4 Their Size!"

:p
 
No one knows why jobs said it. maybe to underestimate samsung and the rivals or maybe he thought 9.7 is the best.

9.7/10.1 can be good for everything but 7.8 is better to carry around.
 
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