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

This is What a 7.85-Inch iPad Looks and Feels Like

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0_1 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile/9A405)

I think a smaller iPad is a strategic decision, not a functional one. However, if you have kids, most families can't go out and buy 1,2,3 iPads for everyone.

So, it's a strategic price point issue to me. Could the low end 7.85" iPad actually be $199? Probably not. But what about $249, 299? Is someone going to see the kindle fire at $199 and say that, for an extra $50-100 I get the benefits of an iPad?

I think this is the core question, moreso than whether a 7.85" tablet is a usable experience.
 
How else is Apple going to get a Retina Display?

Decrease the screen size run the same resolution!!!
 
wkadamsjr said:
Apple couldn't care less about the success of the Fire. So a lot of people are buying it. :rolleyes: I seem to remember a few "iPhone killers" that initially sold like crazy and turned out to be huge disappointments after the fact (see Palm Pre, Samsung Instinct, just to name a couple). Apple does not over-react to its competitors successes.

I have never cared for the larger screens I see on android phones, and I certainly see no use for a smaller iPad. While some may have interest in buying a smaller iPad, it would cannibalize Apple's other products, and we all know Apple wouldn't want to risk that.

Likewise, Apple has no desire to make a more "price-friendly" option. If that were the case, wouldn't Apple make a 7- or 8-inch notebook? I call this "rumor" wishful thinking at best. I would be shocked to see Apple actually release this.
Click to expand...
The iPod Touch and iPhone 3gs are both price friendly options
 
iPad 3: 7.85'' design with no bezel, same screen real estate as iPad 2. Retina Display. Charging dock on the elongated side that can connect into a keyboard dock accessory.
 
Shadyriley said:
iPad 3: 7.85'' design with no bezel, same screen real estate as iPad 2. Retina Display. Charging dock on the elongated side that can connect into a keyboard dock accessory.
Click to expand...

If I understand you correctly, you're confusing the screen size for total size. The screen of the current iPad itself has a 9.7" diagonal. With the bezel, which is necessary to avoid accidental input from your gripping hand, it is almost 12" diagonally.
 
MythicFrost said:
This is all I've got to say about an iPad Mini:

1) The iPad Mini would have a very similar bill of materials to the iPad, so if Apple lowered the price they would be making less money than they do now.

2) It would add additional cost for design (laying out the internals, etc.) and actual production for a smaller device. (Plus they also sell out of iPad's after release, so they would need to decrease the amount of iPad's they produce to make room for the iPad Mini.)

3) The iPad Mini would be lighter, but not by much. It would also have a lot less battery life and it would get hotter unlike the current iPad which doesn't seem to get hot at all and has amazing battery life.

4) The market for those who will buy a 7.85 inch iPad Mini but not a 9.7 inch iPad is quite likely very small. The iPad Mini would also eat away at the sales of the iPad as the majority of buyers would have already been going to buy an iPad.

5) Developers have to support another device. It's potentially problematic for the iPad Mini to retain the same 1024x768 resolution as the iPad as well as small UI elements on the iPad may be too small on the iPad Mini. But, it's more problematic for them to change the resolution.

A lot of what I say is speculation but it makes sense to me. I only see this costing them more money, adding more work for developers, all whilst bringing in few new customers and hacking away at the already successful iPad.

I can understand why someone would want a 7.85 inch iPad, but I just don't believe there's a large enough market of people who want that and only that, for Apple to make any money out of it.
Click to expand...

With iPad 3 around the corner, the original iPad has to take a massive drop anyway. Better then to slash it, re-use the internals and put it up as a 8Gb 7" inch option (raking in nice profits on storage upgrades). Personally, i'd take it even further and actually drop specs, but thats me.
 
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0_1 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9A405 Safari/7534.48.3)

Apple couldn't care less about the success of the Fire. So a lot of people are buying it. :rolleyes: I seem to remember a few "iPhone killers" that initially sold like crazy and turned out to be huge disappointments after the fact (see Palm Pre, Samsung Instinct, just to name a couple). Apple does not over-react to its competitors successes.

I have never cared for the larger screens I see on android phones, and I certainly see no use for a smaller iPad. While some may have interest in buying a smaller iPad, it would cannibalize Apple's other products, and we all know Apple wouldn't want to risk that.

Likewise, Apple has no desire to make a more "price-friendly" option. If that were the case, wouldn't Apple make a 7- or 8-inch notebook? I call this "rumor" wishful thinking at best. I would be shocked to see Apple actually release this.
 
divinox said:
With iPad 3 around the corner, the original iPad has to take a massive drop anyway. Better then to slash it, re-use the internals and put it up as a 8Gb 7" inch option (raking in nice profits on storage upgrades). Personally, i'd take it even further and actually drop specs, but thats me.
Click to expand...
It'd actually be far cheaper for them to simply slash the price on the existing models rather than setup production for a smaller device which they would have to design. (I'm not talking external design, but internal.)
 
My opinion,

I haven't seen any touted resolution for the iPad Mini, just a specific size.

What I think is happening is that either Apple is simply making a smaller less-functional (eg no forward facing cameras) that is still software identical to the iPad2 and iPad3. Or they might be targeting the "ebook reader" audience. The Fire is not competition, not by a long shot. None of the Android tablets are usable, and stores carrying Android tablets have to practically give them away.

Think about it, what incentive does Apple have for making a smaller iPad except to make something more upscale that works with all your existing apple gear? None.

The Asian market is all about their tiny-but-usable devices, so the iPad Mini fits in more with the kind of stuff you'd find in East Asia. If I were betting money, I'd place it on a iStuff revamp like this...

iPod touch is replaced with unlocked iPhone 4/4S at 199 price point
iPhone 4/4S is replaced with the iPhone5 LTE at 399
iPad2 3G is replaced with iPad3 LTE at 599
Existing iPad2 3G becomes 249 model
iPad Mini Wifi only at 249 also replaces iPod Touch or becomes the "iPod touch"
iPod nano and shuffle remain as the music-only devices
AppleTv becomes iTV mini (the box) along with a iTV full experience at 24"+ in the same context as the MacMini and iMac.

Just for lulz, I'll also suggest that the next MacPro comes in a full size (4 PCIe 3.0 slots that can accommodate 4 highest end video cards, DP CPU configuration) and a Mini size (1 PCIe 3.0 slot, 1 CPU)

At any rate, the only reasonable expectation from Apple is to drop the higher capacity models of existing iPhone/iPod/iPad's when the next version comes out. We do not yet know if Apple will drop the 3G models of the iPad2 or drop the iPad2 completely for the next version. It seems like the only reason the 3G models are produced is to make them "PC-less", since WiFi is a pain in the behind to explain to Grandma and Grandpa.
 
Judas1 said:
I'm getting tired of people blindly following the status quo and not being able to see the benefits of a 7+ inch tablet.
Click to expand...


Then you must be really really tired of Apple for not following the status quo and not putting out a 7 inch iPad cause they can't see the benefits of that size.
 
I give credit to Apple for releasing the original ipad but now their reacting to competition (if this is true). People were asking Steve Jobs and company for a smaller ipad over a year ago and Steve condemned it. It's the same thing that happened with large displayed Android's. Apple condemns them but large screen Android phones and smaller Kindle fires are tearing up the sales chart.
Apple should have focused on this instead of taking it's competitors to court. Apple wasted a year in front of judges for nothing.
 
brewcitywi said:
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0_1 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile/9A405)

I think a smaller iPad is a strategic decision, not a functional one. However, if you have kids, most families can't go out and buy 1,2,3 iPads for everyone.

So, it's a strategic price point issue to me. Could the low end 7.85" iPad actually be $199? Probably not. But what about $249, 299? Is someone going to see the kindle fire at $199 and say that, for an extra $50-100 I get the benefits of an iPad?

I think this is the core question, moreso than whether a 7.85" tablet is a usable experience.
Click to expand...


I don't get why people equate a 7 inch tablets for kids. I'm a grown man and find 10 inches too big. And it's not about price. I'm willing to pay $400 to $500 for a 7 inch tablet that has a high quality build, higher resolution display and faster processor. It would be a bonus if Apple can do a 7 incher for $300 but it would eat into the 10 inch model.

And with the Samsung Galaxy note blurring the lines between phone and tablet the form factor could take off. Apple just won't be there with a similar product, not in the near future.
 
Last edited:
Judas1 said:
I'm getting tired of people blindly following the status quo and not being able to see the benefits of a 7+ inch tablet. You're not being asked to like it, or to prefer it over the current size. Just to acknowledge that it has its usefulness. The most obvious one being a lighter weight. If you don't prefer the smaller size, fine, go with current size. It won't bother anybody even the people that prefer the smaller size.
Click to expand...

Well, duh...Since I am not the one having to produce and market those tablets and deal with any possible product cannibalisation, we can all be clamouring for 100 different sizes of ipads without any rammifications. If we don't like it, we don't have to buy it, and can make fun of them in macrumours all day, so it really doesn't impact us one bit.:rolleyes:

Obviously, there has to be some niche appeal for a tablet of that size, that I don't deny, but the whole point is that Apple has other things to consider beyond just bending over backwards catering to the wants of a target few. The resources spent developing that 7" ipad could be resources better spent on finetuning the next gen MBA or Imac, for instance.
 
Misaki said:
AppleTv becomes iTV mini (the box) along with a iTV full experience at 24"+ in the same context as the MacMini and iMac.
Click to expand...

"iTV" was actually the original name for the AppleTV. They changed it after the British television network "ITV" threatened legal action. They probably would again if Apple tried to launch another product under this name.
 
charlituna said:
Then you must be really really tired of Apple for not following the status quo and not putting out a 7 inch iPad cause they can't see the benefits of that size.
Click to expand...
I don't have a problem with Apple doing what it feel is best for itself. I have a problem with the blind followers who can't see beyond what is cuurently being offered to them. Its always perfect already until it changes, then its even more perfect.
Abazigal said:
Well, duh...Since I am not the one having to produce and market those tablets and deal with any possible product cannibalisation, we can all be clamouring for 100 different sizes of ipads without any rammifications. If we don't like it, we don't have to buy it, and can make fun of them in macrumours all day, so it really doesn't impact us one bit.:rolleyes:

Obviously, there has to be some niche appeal for a tablet of that size, that I don't deny, but the whole point is that Apple has other things to consider beyond just bending over backwards catering to the wants of a target few. The resources spent developing that 7" ipad could be resources better spent on finetuning the next gen MBA or Imac, for instance.
Click to expand...
They shouldn't cater to a target few. But I would argue that its not a target few, but a sizable group. And its offering variety, because one size doesn't fit everyone. If the current size fits you then thats great. That doesn't mean it should fit everyone, and that those who clamor for something different are the few that can just be ignored. With all the money they have, you think its a waste of resource to reuse the SAME parts as the ipad, but with a maller screen? Please, it called an investment, and no less a worthy investment than updating the MBA or Imac.
 
They shouldn't cater to a target few. But I would argue that its not a target few, but a sizable group. And its offering variety, because one size doesn't fit everyone. If the current size fits you then thats great. That doesn't mean it should fit everyone, and that those who clamor for something different are the few that can just be ignored. With all the money they have, you think its a waste of resource to reuse the SAME parts as the ipad, but with a maller screen? Please, it called an investment, and no less a worthy investment than updating the MBA or Imac.
Click to expand...

I fully agree that you are right in that it probably makes sense now for another tablet form factor to be released to appeal to as broad a consumer base as possible. What with the ipad having established market dominance and currently being viewed as the gold standard with which all subsequent tablets are inevitably compared with.

However, from what I see, people seem to want a 7" ipad primarily as a portable e-reader which they can fit in their coat pocket, for which there are already perfectly viable substitutes available. The main draw of the ipad is that it is crammed chock full of features, which in turn inevitably drives up the price. Which means that if these features do not work as well on a smaller screen, you are paying through your nose for stuff you don't need or cannot use properly.

My suspicion of why Apple did not offer a smaller ipad before is because that would make a number of the uses of the original ipad less efficient (garageband or simple word processing comes to mind), ultimately making it just an overpriced e-reader. The last thing they want is to be suckered into a price war with kindle or nook.

Feel free to flame away. :D
 
cdmoore74 said:
I don't get why people equate a 7 inch tablets for kids. I'm a grown man and find 10 inches too big. And it's not about price. I'm willing to pay $400 to $500 for a 7 inch tablet that has a high quality build, higher resolution display and faster processor. It would be a bonus if Apple can do a 7 incher for $300 but it would eat into the 10 inch model.

And with the Samsung Galaxy note blurring the lines between phone and tablet the form factor could take off. Apple just won't be there with a similar product, not in the near future.
Click to expand...

7" thing is not even a tablet. Anything tablet is considered great for will suck on 7" screen. Even if you increase screen resolution you can't make your fingers smaller, more precise and going back to stylus for all is not an options too.

Obviously there are people that like all kinds of things in all kinds of sizes, but being successful for a company like Apple means you need to have not only a great product, know how to sell it, but also have lineup that makes sense.

If anything Apple will sell iPad 2 for 399 when iPad 3 is introduced and people will line in droves to buy it regardless of it's screen size.
 
Can't Stop said:
7" thing is not even a tablet. Anything tablet is considered great for will suck on 7" screen. Even if you increase screen resolution you can't make your fingers smaller, more precise and going back to stylus for all is not an options too.

Obviously there are people that like all kinds of things in all kinds of sizes, but being successful for a company like Apple means you need to have not only a great product, know how to sell it, but also have lineup that makes sense.

If anything Apple will sell iPad 2 for 399 when iPad 3 is introduced and people will line in droves to buy it regardless of it's screen size.
Click to expand...
They've not even changed the screen on the iPhone yet... so I doubt they will introduce another iPad just for the sake of it.

Hm, if it's not broken then don't fix it; that's the saying. But we'll see. It just doesn't make much sense to me personally.

Cheers.
 
Liquinn said:
They've not even changed the screen on the iPhone yet... so I doubt they will introduce another iPad just for the sake of it.

Hm, if it's not broken then don't fix it; that's the saying. But we'll see. It just doesn't make much sense to me personally.

Cheers.
Click to expand...

Indeed. Your never know when it comes to Apple. There were things that made all sense in the world and Apple proved us wrong.
 
iPod Touch XL instead of iPad Mini

Apple should go for an Extra Large iPod Touch for music, gaming & general net surfing instead of iPad 7.85". I don't see the point of a smaller iPad now that Apple has cornered the 10" tablet market altogether. Allowing your competitors to offer alternatives in smaller format (Kindle & Galaxy 8") is a win-win situations for all.

iPad- mobile, light computing, Asus netbook killer
iPhone-pocketable messenger & communicator, BB killer
iPod Touch XL- gaming & music for teenagers, PSP killer (?)

:apple:
 
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