Why a 7.85" Screen for the Rumored 'iPad Mini' Makes Sense

[knucklehead]

An Idiots Guide To Visualizing The 7.85 Display

It doesn't matter if the pixel math adds up....

Does Apple need an intermediate-sized device in its lineup? NO.

Are users complaining about and rejecting the unwieldy size of the current iPad, clamoring for a smaller size? NO.

Do the thousands of app developers want their apps -- which they've meticulously designed -- to suddenly be a shrunken experience, even if it does still meet the human interface guidelines? NO.

NEVER. GOING. TO. HAPPEN.

Never is quite a long time. Are you really sure of this?

-------------------------------------------------------------

An Idiots Guide To Visualizing The 7.85 Display


1. Get a piece of cardboard, a ruler, pair of scissors and an iPad.

2. Using your scissors, cut the cardboard into a rectangle measuring 4.7" by 6.28".

3. Sit in a chair in front of a table.

4. Place the iPad propped up at the proper viewing angle relative to your head about 2'6" in front of your eyeballs.

5. Pick up the piece of cardboard and hold it up between the iPad and your eyeballs untill it just completely blocks out the iPad display.

6. Being very careful to not move your head foreword or back, move the cardboard so that it no longer blocks your view of the iPad display.

7. Look at what you are seeing.

POP QUIZ !!! ------ What is it that you are looking at?

(Hint - Try this a few times starting out a few times holding the cardboard various distances in front of your face -- the sort of distances you would consider reading distances. Maintaing the distance of the cardboard in front of your face, move your head towards or away from the iPad until you have satisfied step 5.
Move on to step 6,
and then ruminate at step 7.
Open various apps, and repeat.
If you happen to have a retina and a non retina iPad, repeat above steps using each.
Does anything look like a problem?)

 

[MattInOz]

This could very easily be a 7.85 inch device with no bezel at all, since at that size the device does become one-handable and pocketable. Remember folks, the only reason the iPad has a fat bezel in the first place is because you can't hold it with one hand. Everyone's making the mistake of comparing a 9.7" device to a 7.85" device, when really they should be comparing the true size of the iPad (11.75" with bezel) to a no-bezel iPod that measures 7.85". The difference is much more astounding when you account for the bezel.

This is a big difference between them current iPad and the 'tween device.
The fat bezel on the iPad isn't really needed. The way Apple shows it being held is not that practical or comfortable. You can hold the device securely so that the thumb on the holding hand can still be used to touch controls in that corner the other hand roam the full screen. So even with "fatish" hands the bezel of the current iPad could be halved and the screen made larger.

So they could keep the iPad current size but push the screen up. Interestingly at 10.4 the long edge of the smaller iPad will be the same as the short edge of this smaller pad. They could create a series that mirrors A paper sizes. each step up is double the area but only it one direction. If there are multiple sizes then having a vastly better way of layout interfaces is needed. Which could be part of the reason Apple made Autolayout first for Cocoa but if it comes to iOS 6 then different screen sizes are pretty much certain around iOS 7 - 2014.

so:-
iNote A5replacement 7.85 - 768 x 1024 (retina 1536 x 2048)
iPad A4 replacement 11.2 - 1024 x 1536 (retina 2048 x 3072)
iSketch A3replacement 15.7 - 1536 x 2048 (retina 3072 x 4096)
iDraft A2 replacement 22.4 - 2048 x 3072 (retina 4096 x 6144)
iBoard A1 replacement 31.4 - 3072 x 4096 (retina 6144 x 8192)

 

[Gjwilly]

The people saying there is no need for this are very short-sighted.
The demand for this in Industry is absolutely HUGE.
Amost every industry is finally going green, or paperless, or whatever you want to call it nowadays and the search for a small, reliable, wireless data-receiving, data-input device is most definitely on.
My company looked at devices from Apple, HP, Samsung, Motorola, LG, etc., and time and time again, the ideal device was described as a "smaller iPad".
We talked with partner industries all across the nation to see what they were using and they had the exact same needs.
Something that could go into a cargo pocket or a tool cart.
Something that could slip into a truck console.
Something that was handheld but that still had a usable screen.
UPS drivers, warehouse workers, nurses, maintenance workers, and installers....
Apple would gain millions of new corporate customers.

 

[RaoulDuke42]

Why does it have to be 1024x768?

I believe Apple should and will make a 7" iPad at some point. with a 7.85" diagonal, if they made the resolution 1600x1200 the screen dpi would be 255-- so nicely between the iPhone's 326 and the 9.7" 240. Also, the 3x2 aspect ratio of the iPhone and iPod is choice. Nice compromise between 16x9 and 4x3, and the 3x2 photos from dSLR cameras fit perfectly. Make the 7" iPad a 3x2 ratio pleaz (which will change those rez's a bit, sure). So yeah. Do that Apple. Go.

 

[fertilized-egg]

This could very easily be a 7.85 inch device with no bezel at all, since at that size the device does become one-handable and pocketable.
...
A 7.85 inch device with no bezel is (a) perfectly one-handable and, (b) pocketable.

I agree and from the rumors it does seem Apple is going that direction. I was wondering why they'd make a tweener device with a relatively large display but if the bezel is going to be very thin, it does make a lot of sense.

The bezel could also explain why iPhone's display size isn't growing. Apple could very well want to increase the display size to appease some of the customers but they likely 1) don't want to increase it so much that it's hard to use one hand and more importantly 2) want to keep the current iPhone size. LG did announce they are using the in-cell technology which will allow the touch/display panels to be both thinner and have less bezel so it's very possible that this is the year they finally increase the size.

 

[dethmaShine]

To be honest, I would much prefer a 7.85" iPad against a 9.7" iPad majorly because it so much more portable and easier to hold.

+

My major job for an iPad is to watch videos/emails/iBooks and other trivial tasks. I'm pretty sure iPad Mini is going to serve me better.

 

[ckurt25]

No one needed an iPod until Apple made it.
No one needed an iPod Mini...
No one needed an iPod Nano...
No one needed an iPhone...
No one needed an iPod Touch...
No one needed an iPad...

No one needs an iPad Mini (or whatever they call it IF they make it), but it will sell like hot cakes.

For ME, I would be very interested in a 7.85" iPad. Other than when watching movies, I find the current version a little on the big side. Yes, If I go from a 10" to 7.85" device I know I'm giving up precious real estate but it's still about 2.25 times bigger than an iPhone instead of 2.85 (current iPad). I could honestly care less if it's retina or now. maybe my eyes are that bad or I don't pay attention that closely but my iPhone 4S and my original iPad both have great screens.

Personally, I do think it would be smart for Apple to offer a smaller version at a reduced price, retina or not. $299 for a 16 GB wifi version would be one I'd purchase in a heart beat and give my original iPad to my 10 year old.

At the highest number, how many different versions of an iPod was Apple selling at the same time, 4 or 5? I don't see a problem with selling 3 versions of the iPad at the same time.

Someone posted early on something about it being too big for their pocket. I think I pulled a muscle in my eye socket because my eyes rolled so fast. Do you really think it's meant to be a pocket device? Maybe women can put it in their purses but a 3.5" screen iPhone is meant for the pocket. MAYBE a 4" one but anything bigger and you're pushing what's comfortable. I'm 6'4" and have a 36" waist so if anything, my front pants pocket is bigger than average. 10 years ago the trend was to get phones as small as possible. Now the shift is to make the screens as big as possible. I think the iPhone is the right size but that's just my $.02. I'd MUCH rather have a smaller iPad than a bigger iPhone. Who knows, maybe we'll see both.

 

[APlotdevice]

I believe Apple should and will make a 7" iPad at some point. with a 7.85" diagonal, if they made the resolution 1600x1200 the screen dpi would be 255-- so nicely between the iPhone's 326 and the 9.7" 240. Also, the 3x2 aspect ratio of the iPhone and iPod is choice. Nice compromise between 16x9 and 4x3, and the 3x2 photos from dSLR cameras fit perfectly. Make the 7" iPad a 3x2 ratio pleaz (which will change those rez's a bit, sure). So yeah. Do that Apple. Go.

That's a completely different resolution from any other iOS device. Which means apps would need to independently support it in order to completely fill out the display. Existing iPad apps could only run in an even smaller 1024x768 frame. Even the iPhone's 3:2 apps couldn't be stretched edge to edge, since it's not an exact multiple of that resolution.

 

[knucklehead]

No one needed an iPod until Apple made it.

Someone posted early on something about it being too big for their pocket. I think I pulled a muscle in my eye socket because my eyes rolled so fast. Do you really think it's meant to be a pocket device? Maybe women can put it in their purses but a 3.5" screen iPhone is meant for the pocket. MAYBE a 4" one but anything bigger and you're pushing what's comfortable. I'm 6'4" and have a 36" waist so if anything, my front pants pocket is bigger than average. 10 years ago the trend was to get phones as small as possible. Now the shift is to make the screens as big as possible. I think the iPhone is the right size but that's just my $.02. I'd MUCH rather have a smaller iPad than a bigger iPhone. Who knows, maybe we'll see both.

7.85" diagonal is pocketable in the sense that it will slip into an average rear pocket (such as Levi's) with an inch or two protruding out the top. Your hands are free, and your iPad will follow you around.
Attempting to use in any front pocket is definitely not recommended.

 

[Amazing Iceman]

I can see you have never worked in a big organisation. As a Product Manager I would train various teams around the world including local sales/marketing teams, product support, installation, training, etc. We are talking enterprise systems worth millions of dollars. We're talking product training rather than how to sell something. The local sales people were the best in the business earning big money. If necessary I would fly in to deliver board level presentations to major corporate clients.

I'm not mad my friend and honestly I don't care what you think. I run my own successful business now and make a lot of money doing it. I'm perfectly happy with who I am and what I've achieved in my career believe me.

Good for you. No hard feelings. I guess we both went nuts yesterday getting into this discussion. I guess not very person sees things the same way, and we all need to understand that. Sorry if I offended you. Cheers!

 

[Cool Hand Pete]

Apple condescends occasionally

I'll begin by admitting my bias. I ordered an iPad 3, 64 GB, Verizon LTE on opening day (it arrived via FedEx in the afternoon of launch day), and after spending 2 days with it, I promptly returned it. It was too big. I had been excited for months at the thought of up-scaling my intensive app use from my iPhone upon transfer to my iPad, and the device was just not right for me. I travel between clients often (I work with kids in their homes) and I had assumed (wrongly, I know, and without good evidence) that the devices could be held in one hand and operated in the other. In theory, this is true, but in practice, people set them down on something much more often.

I feel as if I saved $905.

Now, the thought of paying $400 for a similar device, in a smaller form factor, even without the retina display, is a no-brainer. The device would surely be light enough to hold in one hand. I printed a mockup of a 7.85-inch iPad and have been holding it to envision the user experience, and I really like it.

My other rationale for Apple releasing a non-retina iPad is this: Apple tends to condescend occasionally to meet the needs of a demographic that (a) cannot afford the premium cost of most Apple products, but (b) salivates at the thought of owning one just like the rest of us.

Right now, the iPod Touch may be an example of this. It's cheaper than the iPhone, and can't do quite as much, but it satisfies most of the desired ends of having an iPhone.

The iPod Mini, or iPod Shuffle also may be examples of Apple condescending to let the untouched market get its hands on Apple devices.

I'm really hoping Apple releases a Kindle-Killer, because there's no way I'm buying a Kindle Fire (you've got me, Apple!) After trial-and-error, I've realized the smaller (7.85-inch) size would be perfect for my needs.

 

[69650]

Good for you. No hard feelings. I guess we both went nuts yesterday getting into this discussion. I guess not very person sees things the same way, and we all need to understand that. Sorry if I offended you. Cheers!

Yeah sorry mate. Sorry if I offended you to. Just having a bad day I think. These disucssions go a little nuts sometimes. Thanks for the reply. Must be the hot weather, I'm not used to it living in the UK. Cheers

 

[DeeEss]

I want a "15 maxi iPad!

 

[saintforlife]

I just had a déjà vu moment all over again.

 

[RaoulDuke42]

My numbers were wrong

That's a completely different resolution from any other iOS device. Which means apps would need to independently support it in order to completely fill out the display. Existing iPad apps could only run in an even smaller 1024x768 frame. Even the iPhone's 3:2 apps couldn't be stretched edge to edge, since it's not an exact multiple of that resolution.

1600*1200 would be a 4x3 aspect ratio too I realized. Seems to me the easiest solution would be to chop the current iPad in half- resulting in two 2:3 aspect ratio "retina" rez mini-iPads at 1536x1024. Current iPod Touch and iPhone apps would scale easily at a 1.6x magnification (or do just a 1.5x magnification to leave a lil' border ala' the full size iPad and how it runs iPhone apps), and full size iPad apps would require precious little re-jiggering by developers since the dpi would be identical and in landscape mode on the iPad mini it'd be like having the top half of a full size iPad in portrait mode.

 

[rendevouspoo]

I'm really hoping Apple releases a Kindle-Killer, because there's no way I'm buying a Kindle Fire (you've got me, Apple!) After trial-and-error, I've realized the smaller (7.85-inch) size would be perfect for my needs.

Sounds like a Nexus 7 would be perfect for you.

 

[ucfgrad93]

7.85" diagonal is pocketable in the sense that it will slip into an average rear pocket (such as Levi's) with an inch or two protruding out the top. Your hands are free, and your iPad will follow you around.
Attempting to use in any front pocket is definitely not recommended.

Agreed. I can put my Kindle 3 in my back pocket without any problem. So I think an iPad mini would fit as well.

 

[Yvan256]

Guys, at some point, there will be different screen sizes. Apple definitely will extend the portfolio covering a number of screen sizes.

iMacs at 21", 27". Use to come at 17", 24", 30" (others?)
MacbookPros at 13", 15", 17"

At some point, Apple will definitely introduce different screen sizes for the iPad as well as the iPhone. It was and has been, always the trend.

iMacs used to be available in three sizes, now it's only available in two.
MacBook Pro used to be available in three sizes, now it's only available in two.

The trend is the exact opposite of what you said.

 

[RaoulDuke42]

Trends depend on the timeline length

iMacs used to be available in three sizes, now it's only available in two.
MacBook Pro used to be available in three sizes, now it's only available in two.

The trend is the exact opposite of what you said.

Originally the Mac had only one screen size- 9"
Originally there was only the "Mac Portable" in the laptop category- a 9.8" display (at 640x400 black and white!)

Eventually other variants came to be. As it will and should be with iOS devices.

 

[APlotdevice]

Originally the Mac had only one screen size- 9"
Originally there was only the "Mac Portable" in the laptop category- a 9.8" display (at 640x400 black and white!)

Eventually other variants came to be. As it will and should be with iOS devices.

You can't necessarly compare computers to tablets. With the former screen size doesn't really affect the user interface since you're interacting with it through external devices (ie mouse/trackpad and keyboard). With the latter it does since every interactive element has to be at least the size of the average finger tip.

 

[RaoulDuke42]

Different sizes

You can't necessarly compare computers to tablets. With the former screen size doesn't really affect the user interface since you're interacting with it through external devices (ie mouse/trackpad and keyboard). With the latter it does since every interactive element has to be at least the size of the average finger tip.

Fair enough, but it seems to me that if people are getting along ok with 3.5" displays on iPhones, a 7" display should work just fine. Google and other companies apparently agree with me. I think the whole proclamation back in the day about 10" being the "perfect" size for a tablet was a bit of the reality distortion field/marketing noise in effect, as clearly there is some kind of demand for tablets that fit into large pockets and or purses.