User Name
Password

Register Members List Calendar Search FAQ Posting Guidelines
iPad-Mini Rumor
Page 5 of 13 Previous 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9  Next Last Thread Tools
Robo
Formerly Roboman, still
awesome
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Portland, OR
 
2012-05-06, 02:35

Quote:
Originally Posted by hmurchison View Post
A $299 9.7" iPad isn't going to happen.
Okay.

Why not? Selling a $299 iPad 2 next year would mirror the strategy that's proven exceptionally successful for them with the iPhone. They've already shown a preference for discounting last year's model instead of introducing a new low-end model once. Why is continuing their currently hugely successful iOS device strategy so much less likely than doing an about-face and introducing a new low-end model? What makes this time so much different?

Quote:
Originally Posted by torifile View Post
I haven't really seen a coherent list of the drawbacks to a 7" tablet, so why don't we start one:

- text size would require frequent zooming
- ?? (Seriously, I don't know what other disadvantages there would be).
They're impossible to type on, for starters. Seriously, go to a Best Buy and try if you don't believe me. There are 7" tablets on the market now; these are not secrets.

All the evidence suggests that, on average, 7" tablet users use their tablets less than 9.7" tablet users. It's just not as good of an experience — too much scrolling, too much zooming — and the marginal increase in mobility clearly doesn't make up for that (or else 7" tablet users would be the ones using their tablets the most).

Also, from a business perspective, introducing a new size of tablet would fragment the user base and require more work from the savvy developers who wouldn't want their iPad apps to be just squeezed down.

Quote:
Originally Posted by torifile
Advantages:

- portability
- cost
- marketshare (?)
A $299 iPad mini wouldn't be any cheaper than a $299 iPad 2.

The fact that "lower cost" keeps on getting pulled out as one of the iPad mini's key reasons to exist just suggests to me that even its proponents here view the small size as a compromise, not a feature, because it's usually not a forgone conclusion in technology that smaller gadgets cost less. Would most people choose a 7" iPad over a 9.7" one at the same price? If not, wouldn't that suggest that most people find the smaller size a compromise, not a feature? And wouldn't it be more Apple-like to just wait until they can deliver $299 tablet buyers an experience without such a major compromise, one that delivers the full experience users expect from the iPad brand?

I mean, what's the rush? Android? Windows RT?

Why is a $299 iPad mini this holiday season so necessary? Why is a $299 iPad 2 next spring so much less likely? And if most people would choose a $299 9.7" iPad over an equally-priced iPad mini, why would Apple bother with the iPad mini? They're not going to sell two $299 iPads.

and i guess i've known it all along / the truth is, you have to be soft to be strong
 
Chinney
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Ottawa, ON
 
2012-05-06, 11:40

I guess I just go back to the basic issue of size. For some uses for some people a smaller iPad would be better, and I expect those people would buy it at the same price point as a larger iPad.

When there's an eel in the lake that's as long as a snake that's a moray.
 
Kraetos
Lovable Bastard
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Boston-ish
 
2012-05-06, 15:10

Quote:
Originally Posted by hmurchison View Post
A $299 9.7" iPad isn't going to happen. If you're Apple a little cannibalization is good but you don't want to get too crazy with it.
Yeah, Apple would never risk cannibalizing sales with a two year old, $200 off model.

Quote:
The ideal is to satiate the low end market with a highly affordable model at the same time you satiate the smaller but significant market that needs something a bit smaller/lighter.
Who's ideal? Yours? Because Apple's iOS strategy thus far has been exceedingly clear: release new model, sell old model for $100 less, for up to two years. What I am robo are suggesting isn't surprising at all since it's exactly what Apple has been doing thus far. What iPad mini proponents are suggesting is that Apple basically throw out the "sell last years model" which isn't going to happen because it's ridiculously profitable.

Quote:
Originally Posted by torifile View Post
I haven't really seen a coherent list of the drawbacks to a 7" tablet, so why don't we start one:
- Web sites would require frequent zooming.
- The keyboard would be too small.
- It's in no-mans-land, UI wise. Does it take the pane based approach of the iPhone, or a popover based UI on the iPad? Neither of these is really ideal.
- It would only be an ounce or two lighter, an inch or two smaller, and a $100 or so cheaper.

But by far the most important is that it wouldn't be compatible with existing apps. Apple would be asking developers to support a third screen size. This is the dealbreaker for me. I suspect what would end up happening is that nobody would support it. Most developers would probably decide that running the scaled up version of the iPhone app was good enough, because developers always take the path of least resistance. They didn't do this for the iPad because 9.7" offered clear advantages, but 7" is too close to the iPhone for it to be worth it.

Rallying around an extremely limited number of resolutions makes developers lives' much easier. The App Store is iOS's main competitive advantage. Apple is going to try and keep it as simple as possible for developers, so they keep making great apps, so iOS keeps attracting more customers.

Logic, logic, logic. Logic is the beginning of wisdom, Valeris, not the end.

Last edited by Kraetos : 2012-05-06 at 15:24.
 
torifile
Less than Stellar Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Durham, NC
Send a message via AIM to torifile  
2012-05-06, 16:04

It would the 1024x768 version of the iPad with higher pixel density. There would be no reworking on code or layout. The keyboard issue isn't one I'd thought about too much because I really believe that people adapt well. It would as wide in portrait as the iPhone is in landscape, I believe. That's not too cramp at all. In fact, that's my preferred typing position on the iPhone.

If it's not red and showing substantial musculature, you're wearing it wrong.
 
hmurchison
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: LV 426
Send a message via ICQ to hmurchison  
2012-05-06, 22:11

Quote:
Originally Posted by torifile View Post
It would the 1024x768 version of the iPad with higher pixel density. There would be no reworking on code or layout. The keyboard issue isn't one I'd thought about too much because I really believe that people adapt well. It would as wide in portrait as the iPhone is in landscape, I believe. That's not too cramp at all. In fact, that's my preferred typing position on the iPhone.
We've said this over an over and he STILL doesn't get. The resolution is the same, the aspect ratio is the same. We're simply talking about targets that are what 30% smaller? This really isn't going to be a technical issue. It's going to be a marketing one.

omgwtfbbq
 
JohnnyTheA
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
 
2012-05-06, 23:55

Quote:
Originally Posted by hmurchison View Post
We've said this over an over and he STILL doesn't get. The resolution is the same, the aspect ratio is the same. We're simply talking about targets that are what 30% smaller? This really isn't going to be a technical issue. It's going to be a marketing one.
Yes, Kraetos doesn't get it. IF Apple decided on a smaller form-factor the ONLY way they would do it is if it maintained compatibility with existing iPhone and iPad apps. The fact that iPad 3 just double the horizontal and vertical number of pixels makes it pretty easy to do this without ANY change by developers at all. They just use the previious 1024x768 resolution. It fits perfectly. That is very much within the realm of Apple to do.

IF Apple doesn't do the smaller form factor, it is because of their own marketing/profit analysis which WE know very little about. If they think they will make lots of money doing it, they will. Any opinion at this point, is just guessing.
 
torifile
Less than Stellar Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Durham, NC
Send a message via AIM to torifile  
2012-05-07, 00:58

Quote:
Originally Posted by hmurchison View Post
We've said this over an over and he STILL doesn't get. The resolution is the same, the aspect ratio is the same. We're simply talking about targets that are what 30% smaller? This really isn't going to be a technical issue. It's going to be a marketing one.
If Apple continues what it's done in the past, it *can't* be a technical issue. There's no way to specify different layouts for different resolutions aside from iPad or iPhone. Chances are, there will be 2 sets of resources - iPad.png and iPad@2x.png in Xcode projects. That's it. (just like there is now, BTW) Even if a developer wanted to change the layout to utilize the space on a retina display, say, more effectively, they couldn't.

If it's not red and showing substantial musculature, you're wearing it wrong.
 
chucker
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: near Bremen, Germany
Send a message via ICQ to chucker Send a message via AIM to chucker Send a message via MSN to chucker Send a message via Yahoo to chucker Send a message via Skype™ to chucker 
2012-05-07, 01:05

Quote:
Originally Posted by hmurchison View Post
We've said this over an over and he STILL doesn't get.
Saying something over and over doesn't make it more correct.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hmurchison View Post
The resolution is the same, the aspect ratio is the same. We're simply talking about targets that are what 30% smaller?
Exactly. We're screwing up touch assumptions on a touch screen UI. But, hey, doesn't matter at all!
 
Kraetos
Lovable Bastard
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Boston-ish
 
2012-05-07, 09:31

Quote:
Originally Posted by torifile View Post
It would the 1024x768 version of the iPad with higher pixel density. There would be no reworking on code or layout. The keyboard issue isn't one I'd thought about too much because I really believe that people adapt well. It would as wide in portrait as the iPhone is in landscape, I believe. That's not too cramp at all. In fact, that's my preferred typing position on the iPhone.
So you would thumb it, Kindle keyboard style? Oh god no, that's like my least favorite keyboard ever.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hmurchison View Post
We've said this over an over and he STILL doesn't get. The resolution is the same, the aspect ratio is the same. We're simply talking about targets that are what 30% smaller? This really isn't going to be a technical issue. It's going to be a marketing one.
So let me see if I've got this straight.

You're suggesting that Apple simply shrink everything to the point of massive frustration and call it a solution? At 1024x768 at 7.85", tap targets would be frustratingly small. A button 44 px wide goes from being about .33 inches diagonal to .25 inches diagonal. This is unacceptable. Apple would never do this in a million years. It flies in the face of everything that modern Apple stands for. The #1 reason the Kindle fire UI is such an awful experience is because everything is too damn small, you miss your tap target all the time on that thing. Now it appears that you're not only suggesting Apple make the iPad mini, but that they should also screw it up in the exact same way Amazon screwed up the Fire, and you have the balls to claim that Apple would do it right even though you're suggesting that Apple adopt one of the single worst decisions the Kindle design team made.

You've brought it up "over and over" and I've ignored it because it's such a laughable assumption given Apple's track record that it didn't even merit a response. "I get it" just fine, but if you are seriously insinuating that Apple is going to half-ass a new hero product in such a manner, I don't think you get it at all. Seriously. Jobs/Cook-era Apple would never half-ass a hero product in a manner that you are suggesting. That you would even bring it up is pretty funny, but that you accuse me of "not getting it" after I ignored it is simply hilarious.

Logic, logic, logic. Logic is the beginning of wisdom, Valeris, not the end.

Last edited by Kraetos : 2012-05-07 at 09:44.
 
JohnnyTheA
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
 
2012-05-07, 23:39

I think many of the controls on iPad apps are already oversized. This is partly due to the fact that with so much area what else do you do when porting over iPhone-only apps? Making all the controls really big helps. Most apps could shrink some without any impact. Shrinking the display IS a watch item though. I am sure Apple would look at all the popular apps and see how they play on the smaller screen before they make such a decision.

But you have to admit that it is possible to do this without any developer impact...
 
Chinney
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Ottawa, ON
 
2012-05-08, 07:08

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kraetos View Post
So you would thumb it, Kindle keyboard style? Oh god no, that's like my least favorite keyboard ever.

[...]
Ten finger typing is great on the iPad, but I also sometimes thumb it. It is a bit big for thumbing, but do-able. A 7" machine would be more of a thumb device, but that's OK since lots of people don't mind thumb keyboarding, and are very fast at it. I don't see the issue here.

The current iPad is a great size and I would never personally get a 7" one. But I do think that there is a market, a considerable market, for the smaller device and that Apple would show the way to implement it elegantly at the hardware and software level.

When there's an eel in the lake that's as long as a snake that's a moray.
 
thegeriatric
geri to my friends
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Heaven
 
2012-05-08, 07:24

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chinney View Post

The current iPad is a great size and I would never personally get a 7" one. But I do think that there is a market, a considerable market, for the smaller device and that Apple would show the way to implement it elegantly at the hardware and software level.
Exactly!
 
Kraetos
Lovable Bastard
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Boston-ish
 
2012-05-08, 11:09

Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnnyTheA View Post
But you have to admit that it is possible to do this without any developer impact...
It's possible to support a new resolution without any developer impact? That's... not true. I really don't know what you're talking about when you say that iPad UI elements are oversized... they seem to be a little on the small side to me.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chinney View Post
Ten finger typing is great on the iPad, but I also sometimes thumb it. It is a bit big for thumbing, but do-able. A 7" machine would be more of a thumb device, but that's OK since lots of people don't mind thumb keyboarding, and are very fast at it. I don't see the issue here.
I honestly don't know anyone who likes the thumb typing on the Kindle, and that's with a hardware keyboard. Nor can I recall any review of the Kindle where the response to the keyboard was anything but it "it's clumsy and obnoxious, but it works."

Don't get me wrong, I am really fast at both types of typing, but if the iPhone keyboard was much larger it would be a pain in the ass. Just like on the Kindle, the keys in the middle of the keyboard get really hard to reach. It's not a pleasant experience at all.

Logic, logic, logic. Logic is the beginning of wisdom, Valeris, not the end.
 
hmurchison
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: LV 426
Send a message via ICQ to hmurchison  
2012-05-09, 04:28

The reason why a $299 iPad wouldn't be as popular is the same reason why the Mac mini doesn't sell to consumers as
much as the iPad. Mac users have generally not minded being a generation behind but they're not going to be too enthused
about being two generation behind. Apple is a premium brand and people by and large expect a premium product.

I won't be surprised if iOS 6.0 delivers some new gestures. I mean we're all sitting here talking about tap targets but slowly we're seeing
gestural based UI take over (Clear anyone?)

Swipes obviate the need for a back button.
Long Tap allows for contextual menus
Pinch Zoom and multi finger gestures will rid us of UI paradigms that assumed a Mouse/KB driven interface.

When I look at iPhoto for iOS I see Apple moving to this trend. They found a way to get rid of sliders and use the color context of a photo
to make adjustments neatly getting rid of the problem with tap targets (although causing some new issues)

I expect to see future iOS versions get even more touch enabled to the point where "Too many button = fail"

omgwtfbbq
 
ezkcdude
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
 
2012-05-09, 07:15

Things I know:
  • Apple is a business.
  • Apple will sell things that are profitable. They will (eventually) stop selling things that are not profitable.
  • If they start selling 7" iPads at any price, it will be because it is profitable to do so.
  • That they are not already selling 7" iPads does not necessarily mean it is not currently profitable to do so, but it is consistent with that hypothesis.
  • The factors that generate profits continually change, and if it is not profitable to introduce a 7" iPad today, that does not mean it will never be profitable to do so.
  • Some women would like smaller iPads.
 
Kraetos
Lovable Bastard
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Boston-ish
 
2012-05-09, 11:39

Quote:
Originally Posted by hmurchison View Post
The reason why a $299 iPad wouldn't be as popular is the same reason why the Mac mini doesn't sell to consumers as
much as the iPad. Mac users have generally not minded being a generation behind but they're not going to be too enthused
about being two generation behind. Apple is a premium brand and people by and large expect a premium product.
Um, Hi? Hello? My name is the Apple iPhone 3GS. I don't know what I've done to offend you, hmurchison, because you seem to have forgotten about me entirely. So, allow me to take this opportunity to introduce myself. I was released on June 19, 2009. A year later, iPhone 4 came out, and Apple started selling me for $99. Then the iPhone 4S came out, and Apple still kept selling me, for $0 on contract. Despite the fact that I am "two generations behind," I am the third best selling smartphone on AT&T. I sell better than most new Android smartphones. I run iOS 5 like a champ and I can handle over 90% of all iPhone apps on the App Store today. I am a resilient little iPhone and I would appreciate it if you would stop belittling my accomplishments.

Please please please please please drop the "Apple wont sell a two generation old product" shtick. It makes you look quite ignorant given that Apple already does this and has been doing it for 7 months.

As for minis, I regret that I cannot reveal my source for this info, but Mac minis sell quite well. Not as well as iPads, but just about nothing sells as well as iPads, because they're freakin' iPads.

Quote:
I won't be surprised if iOS 6.0 delivers some new gestures. I mean we're all sitting here talking about tap targets but slowly we're seeing
gestural based UI take over (Clear anyone?)

Swipes obviate the need for a back button.
Long Tap allows for contextual menus
Pinch Zoom and multi finger gestures will rid us of UI paradigms that assumed a Mouse/KB driven interface.
It probably will, but gestures will always be in addition to buttons. Gestures are like keyboard shortcuts: optional to speed up your workflow, but not mandatory. A gesture will never be as intuitive as a button, since a gesture is not discoverable, but a button is. So if your plan to resolve the keyboard problem on the theoretical iPad mini is a combination of voice activation and gestures... think again.

Quote:
When I look at iPhoto for iOS I see Apple moving to this trend. They found a way to get rid of sliders and use the color context of a photo
to make adjustments neatly getting rid of the problem with tap targets (although causing some new issues)
For app store apps, I expect gestures to become more common. But for stock apps, buttons rule the roost. They're just an order of magnitude more intuitive.

Quote:
I expect to see future iOS versions get even more touch enabled to the point where "Too many button = fail"
This is a poor assumption to make, given that buttons aren't going anywhere. They are and always will be more intuitive and discoverable than any other interaction method, simply because they say what they will do right on them.

Logic, logic, logic. Logic is the beginning of wisdom, Valeris, not the end.
 
hmurchison
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: LV 426
Send a message via ICQ to hmurchison  
2012-05-09, 13:08

For the record I've enjoyed the civil conversation here with all of you. Win/Lose/Draw i'm excited about what this year is going to bring for OS X and iOS products.

I won't be heart broken if a iPm doesn't come but I will view it as a missed opportunity.

omgwtfbbq
 
zippy
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Unknown
 
2012-05-10, 15:21

According to iMore's source (who was very accurate with iPhone 4s and New iPad details), Apple will be rolling out a 7-8" iPad in October. Interestingly, their source indicates that instead of a 1024x768 display, the new unit will feature the same 2048x1536 resolution as the current iPad. This will give it a pixel density on par with the iPhone 4s and make the app fragmentation argument largely moot. Some adjustments may have to be made, but I think those would be trivial.

http://www.imore.com/2012/05/10/7inc...0-price-point/

Do you know where children get all of their energy? - They suck it right out of their parents!
 
Brave Ulysses
BANNED
I am worthless beyond hope.
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
 
2012-05-10, 15:44

Margins wouldn't be big enough.

Why would the run away market leader come out with a loss-leader when they don't have to?
 
hmurchison
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: LV 426
Send a message via ICQ to hmurchison  
2012-05-10, 23:09

Quote:
Originally Posted by zippy View Post
According to iMore's source (who was very accurate with iPhone 4s and New iPad details), Apple will be rolling out a 7-8" iPad in October. Interestingly, their source indicates that instead of a 1024x768 display, the new unit will feature the same 2048x1536 resolution as the current iPad. This will give it a pixel density on par with the iPhone 4s and make the app fragmentation argument largely moot. Some adjustments may have to be made, but I think those would be trivial.

http://www.imore.com/2012/05/10/7inc...0-price-point/
I have a bit of an issue with this report. Not really the retina display but rather the paltry 8GB of NAND storage doesn't see plausible. Having Retina display
and cutting storage are two concepts diametrically opposed to each other. Retina graphics take up more storage. The last thing you want to do is reduce the
storage capacity by 50%

I don't think $200 or $250 is a sane price point. Why give someone something cheap that is going to run out of storage too fast? iOS 6 is going to likely require more storage and/or RAM.

Ideally i'd expect

16GB of NAND storage. Come on folks NAND storage pricing is dynamic and Apple acquired Anobit to leverage tools and expertise that can deliver many writes on 2-bits per cell or even 3-bits per cell NAND storage without too much degradation.

If Sharp was almost ready for the New iPad launch with IGZO technology it is feasible that they've used this extra time to potentially prepare smaller Retina screens. Because IGZO tech doesn't require dual light bars it would be cheaper even in Retina resolutions.

Simply deliver a smaller iPad and 6th Gen iPhone with great battery life and a shiny new iOS and Apple will rule the Holiday season.

omgwtfbbq
 
JohnnyTheA
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
 
2012-05-10, 23:52

Quote:
Originally Posted by hmurchison View Post
Why give someone something cheap that is going to run out of storage too fast? iOS 6 is going to likely require more storage and/or RAM.
Because they want a lower entry-level price point. They do it with all their products.
 
Robo
Formerly Roboman, still
awesome
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Portland, OR
 
2012-05-11, 00:08

Quote:
Originally Posted by zippy View Post
Interestingly, their source indicates that instead of a 1024x768 display, the new unit will feature the same 2048x1536 resolution as the current iPad. This will give it a pixel density on par with the iPhone 4s and make the app fragmentation argument largely moot.
Using the iPad 3 pixel count at a different size causes just as much "fragmentation" as using the iPad 2 pixel count at a different size. The "app fragmentation argument" turns on the "...at a different size" bit, not which of the iPad's current pixel counts is used.

hmurchison might think that many buttons in apps are a bit large for his taste, but the point is, they're always exactly sized to the developer's taste. A developer can draw one button once and know exactly how large it will be on every iPad in existence, as it will be the same size on all of them. That goes away with an iPad mini with a shrunk-down screen, even if it keeps the pixel count the same so apps can "just work, shrunk down a bit." Careless devs might be okay with that. But savvier designers won't be satisfied with just uniformly squishing down all the touch targets — they'll want them to remain the intended size, on all iPads, which means more work.

Let's say you make a game. On a full-size iPad, you want the HUD and controls to take up an eighth of the width of the landscape screen on each side, leaving your intended square field of view for play (I want to keep this simple). But on the iPad mini, you don't want to just shrink the buttons and HUD — you want them to remain the same size, so you create larger art assets so they'll be the intended size when shrunken down. Players' fingers remain the same size no matter what tablet they buy, after all! But since the controls are the same physical size on a smaller screen, they take up more than an eighth of the screen on each side — so your intended square field of view is instead a tall rectangle. You want players to be able to see what's coming from all sides — all your playtesting and difficulty adjustments were geared toward the field of view on the full-size iPad, and you want to keep that the same — so you zoom out on the action so players can see as far to the left and right of the character as they could with the square field of view.

Got that? So not only is everything but the HUD scaled down, compared to the full-size iPad, but the increased real estate needed to keep the HUD the same physical size required zooming out on the action to keep the same field of view, as well. Scaled down and zoomed out — the player character is going to be tiny compared to the full-size iPad version! Or, you could just uniformly scale down everything, including the HUD and controls, and leave players frustrated with too-small buttons.

Anyway. The "retina display at 7 inches" rumor makes especially little sense to me, as such a part would likely cost about as much or more as the 9" retina display. The "1024*768 at 7 inches" rumor was at least in keeping with the idea of a cheaper iPad.

and i guess i've known it all along / the truth is, you have to be soft to be strong
 
JohnnyTheA
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
 
2012-05-11, 00:31

Keeping the iPad 3 matrix size with a 7" size yields a pretty high pixel density. Can people even resolve pixels at that level? Its possible I suppose...

As far as the "it will shrink the controls" argument, I don't think it is that big of a deal. Its not that big of a reduction to make a huge difference. I suppose there are some apps that really pack in the controls that might have an issue, but for 90% of usage (reading email, books, web junk, movies, music) it will not make much of a difference. When people play with them in the store they can make up their mind if they want to sacrifice the big display for save one or two hundred dollars. A couple C-notes is still a lot of money to a LOT of people. Thats why those older iPhones sell well even though they don't make much sense in the long run when you compare total cost of ownership. The same type of folk that buys the iPhone 4 or 3GS will want to save some money and buy this unit.

Now, can they make money this way? Probably... Can they steal/maintain marketshare? Probably...
 
zippy
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Unknown
 
2012-05-11, 01:21

Quote:
Originally Posted by Robo View Post
Using the iPad 3 pixel count at a different size causes just as much "fragmentation" as using the iPad 2 pixel count at a different size. The "app fragmentation argument" turns on the "...at a different size" bit, not which of the iPad's current pixel counts is used.

hmurchison might think that many buttons in apps are a bit large for his taste, but the point is, they're always exactly sized to the developer's taste. A developer can draw one button once and know exactly how large it will be on every iPad in existence, as it will be the same size on all of them. That goes away with an iPad mini with a shrunk-down screen, even if it keeps the pixel count the same so apps can "just work, shrunk down a bit." Careless devs might be okay with that. But savvier designers won't be satisfied with just uniformly squishing down all the touch targets — they'll want them to remain the intended size, on all iPads, which means more work.

Let's say you make a game. On a full-size iPad, you want the HUD and controls to take up an eighth of the width of the landscape screen on each side, leaving your intended square field of view for play (I want to keep this simple). But on the iPad mini, you don't want to just shrink the buttons and HUD — you want them to remain the same size, so you create larger art assets so they'll be the intended size when shrunken down. Players' fingers remain the same size no matter what tablet they buy, after all! But since the controls are the same physical size on a smaller screen, they take up more than an eighth of the screen on each side — so your intended square field of view is instead a tall rectangle. You want players to be able to see what's coming from all sides — all your playtesting and difficulty adjustments were geared toward the field of view on the full-size iPad, and you want to keep that the same — so you zoom out on the action so players can see as far to the left and right of the character as they could with the square field of view.

Got that? So not only is everything but the HUD scaled down, compared to the full-size iPad, but the increased real estate needed to keep the HUD the same physical size required zooming out on the action to keep the same field of view, as well. Scaled down and zoomed out — the player character is going to be tiny compared to the full-size iPad version! Or, you could just uniformly scale down everything, including the HUD and controls, and leave players frustrated with too-small buttons.

Anyway. The "retina display at 7 inches" rumor makes especially little sense to me, as such a part would likely cost about as much or more as the 9" retina display. The "1024*768 at 7 inches" rumor was at least in keeping with the idea of a cheaper iPad.
So shrink the HUD. That's what most people would reasonably expect a developer to do.


I'm not sure I think it would have the retina display either. But it is an interesting take, from a source who has proven to be fairly accurate in recent past. I'm not exactly sure what the specs or price will be, but I'm 80-90% convinced that a 7-8" iPad is coming.

Do you know where children get all of their energy? - They suck it right out of their parents!
 
Robo
Formerly Roboman, still
awesome
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Portland, OR
 
2012-05-11, 01:24

Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnnyTheA View Post
A couple C-notes is still a lot of money to a LOT of people. Thats why those older iPhones sell well even though they don't make much sense in the long run when you compare total cost of ownership. The same type of folk that buys the iPhone 4 or 3GS will want to save some money and buy this unit.

Now, can they make money this way? Probably... Can they steal/maintain marketshare? Probably...
Once again, all of this applies to a $299 iPad 2 as well.

"Apple makes an iPad mini or Apple makes no sub-$399 iPad at all" is a false dichotomy, and people keep basing their argument on that fallacy when they use arguments for a cheaper iPad to support the argument for a smaller one, as if there were no other options for a cheaper iPad.

I'm quite sure everything I just quoted is true. What does it have to do with an iPad mini, though?

and i guess i've known it all along / the truth is, you have to be soft to be strong
 
Robo
Formerly Roboman, still
awesome
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Portland, OR
 
2012-05-11, 01:26

Quote:
Originally Posted by zippy View Post
So shrink the HUD. That's what most people would reasonably expect a developer to do.
What if it makes the controls difficult to use? Or are we in "user experience doesn't matter" mode?
 
chucker
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: near Bremen, Germany
Send a message via ICQ to chucker Send a message via AIM to chucker Send a message via MSN to chucker Send a message via Yahoo to chucker Send a message via Skype™ to chucker 
2012-05-11, 02:16

Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnnyTheA View Post
Keeping the iPad 3 matrix size with a 7" size yields a pretty high pixel density. Can people even resolve pixels at that level? Its possible I suppose…
A smaller device will inevitably lead to people holding it more closely, so the difference wouldn't be that big (if we presuppose that it's proportional, the difference would be exactly zero; do you keep my 15-inch MacBook Pro at 4.3 the distance as a 3.5-inch iPhone? Not quite sure.), actually.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnnyTheA View Post
As far as the "it will shrink the controls" argument, I don't think it is that big of a deal. Its not that big of a reduction to make a huge difference. I suppose there are some apps that really pack in the controls that might have an issue, but for 90% of usage (reading email, books, web junk, movies, music) it will not make much of a difference.
Well, the Instapaper author, for one, disagrees:

Quote:
A 7” display is so much smaller by total area than the iPad’s 10” that most apps’ interfaces will need to be manually adjusted or redesigned. You can’t get reliably usable results by just scaling down 10” apps to a 7” screen automatically.
iOS has been designed from the get-go for pixel-perfectly-designed user interfaces, not for scalable ones. You see this all over the place.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnnyTheA View Post
Now, can they make money this way? Probably... Can they steal/maintain marketshare? Probably...
Steal marketshare? It's still high enough for that to be difficult. Embiggen the market as a whole? Maybe.
 
Kraetos
Lovable Bastard
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Boston-ish
 
2012-05-11, 11:53

Quote:
Originally Posted by Robo View Post
Once again, all of this applies to a $299 iPad 2 as well.
For reasons I'm not quite sure of, the iPad mini proponents are convinced a $299 iPad 2 will never happen, even though it's the single most logical, financially sound, and predictable way for Apple to release a $299 iPad. I honestly have no idea why they've become convinced of this, and beyond simply stating "A $299 9.7" iPad isn't going to happen," no one has explained why they think it won't happen, even though the evidence overwhelmingly says it will happen, either next year or the following one.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Robo View Post
What if it makes the controls difficult to use? Or are we in "user experience doesn't matter" mode?
iPad mini proponents have been in this mode the whole thread, despite the fact they are not developers, even though important developers like Arment correctly point out that it would be a UX nightmare. I don't even really know how this idea that Apple would deem "scaling" to be an acceptable solution entered the conversation to begin with, given that all iOS devices to date have been pixel-perfect.

A 7" $249 iPad mini is a massive course change for iOS for exactly these two reasons, and nary an iPad mini proponent has come up with a real answer to these two questions, instead hammering "MOAR MARKETSHARE" ad nauseam.

And they stick with it, despite the fact that 1) Apple almost always cuts prices on iOS devices with old iOS devices, 2) Apple's App solution for iPad was much more elaborate than "just scale em!" and 3) Apple has shown repeatedly that they care about profit more than market share. iPad mini would be the opposite of all of these things, even though they seem to be pretty central to Apple's iOS strategy.

Maybe they have this mixed up between "will Apple make an iPad mini?" and "do I like the idea of an iPad mini?" Because guess what? I think the iPad mini is kind of a cool concept and I think that a 6" consumption oriented iOS device (likely called iPod, not iPad) is going to come out eventually. But this specific rumor—this year, named iPad, 7.85", same res and scaled, only $249—reeks to high hell of bullshit, and anyone who follows Apple closely should be able to see it. Especially considering that every time we get more details($199, retina, only 8GB), it seems even more ridiculous! If Apple does it, it would be a really big course change. That doesn't guarantee Apple won't do it, and I'll be eating delicious crow if I'm wrong, but I'll be damned if it isn't highly unlikely given Apple's track record and strategic goals. From a supply chain perspective, it's fucking brilliant that Apple has achieved market segmentation using the same product line, and iPad mini would be simply throwing that out the window—along with a whole bunch of profit.

Logic, logic, logic. Logic is the beginning of wisdom, Valeris, not the end.

Last edited by Kraetos : 2012-05-11 at 12:10.
 
hmurchison
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: LV 426
Send a message via ICQ to hmurchison  
2012-05-11, 12:20

The problem is we have multiple sources of varying credulity reporting Apple is at least testing smaller iPad form factors

versus:

Kraetos


Not trying to employe an Appeal to Authority fallacy but when even the WSJ talks about and iPad and Gruber "confirms" that they are "noodling" with smaller designs. I've got to wonder when it's time to punt and just acknowledge that the idea is being tossed around.

omgwtfbbq
 
Kraetos
Lovable Bastard
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Boston-ish
 
2012-05-11, 12:36

Quote:
Originally Posted by hmurchison View Post
WSJ talks about and iPad and Gruber "confirms" that they are "noodling" with smaller designs. I've got to wonder when it's time to punt and just acknowledge that the idea is being tossed around.
No shit. I'm sure there are prototypes, deep in the bowels of Cupertino. The question is whether or not one of them will make it to market.

Last edited by Kraetos : 2012-05-11 at 12:47.
 
Posting Rules Navigation
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Page 5 of 13 Previous 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9  Next Last

Closed

Forum Jump
Thread Tools
Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Rumor: New Mac Mini Coming to Macworld 2009 MacMan05 Speculation and Rumors 3 2008-12-16 15:07
WHAT IS A RUMOR & SPECULATION.. surjones General Discussion 3 2005-04-12 09:42


« Previous Thread | Next Thread »

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:56.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2024, AppleNova