Rumors of an impending Apple iPad mini continue to proliferate, with The New York Times being the latest to weigh in, and Bloomberg and The Wall Street Journal already having had their say, so it's a good time to recount the late Steve Jobs's arguments as to why such a device will be doomed to failure. Much has been made about …

COMMENTS

House rules Send corrections

This topic is closed for new posts.

Page:

Monday 16th July 2012 22:59 GMT An0n C0w4rd

If all these rumours are true regarding a new iPhone form factor and a new iPad form factor, I think they must think they've figured out a way to make the form factor changes less painful than it is on other platforms. However, I can't see that personally. Too many apps have a bitmap for the background that will need redone for a new resolution. If all the stuff went to vector instead of bitmap then it would be more understandable.

4 1
1. Tuesday 17th July 2012 05:54 GMT Martin Huizing
  
  ...like flash?
  
  8 0
2. Tuesday 17th July 2012 06:42 GMT LarsG
  
  The bottom line is this, the Apple 7" tablet will arrive, it's on it's way.
  
  However, it won't be 7" it will be 7.9" that way the company stay true to the Jobs doctrine that 7" tablets are no good.
  
  Alternatively, there is the possibility that the 7" tablet will not be bought out and in fact the new iPhone will bridge the gap with a larger screen.
  
  However, the speculation and sneaky leaks, the what ifs and the deliberate secrecy policy do Apple appear to get up everyone's nose.
  
  1 1
  1. Tuesday 17th July 2012 09:26 GMT Anonymous Coward
    
    How about they call the 7" iThingy the new iPod touch (or perhaps have some other suffix to the iPod like "iPod media") then they can stay true to the 'tablets have to be 10"' rule and indicate that the 7" iThingy is designed for media consumption whereas the iPad is suited to content creation. That way they then have 3 levels of device
    
    iPhone (and possibly still iPod touch) for mobile use
    
    7" iThingy/"iPod media" for personal media consumption
    
    iPad as a general purpose tablet
    
    Note that the Kindle fire and Nexus 7 are both aimed at media consumption so this would be consistent with addressing that market and also making a statement that iPad is something different
    
    4 0
    1. Tuesday 17th July 2012 09:45 GMT Charlie Clark
      
      I-Book? I-Pod Max? They might certainly want to keep their toes in the pure consumer world that Amazon and now Google are going for.
      
      I agree that 7" is too small for many productivity apps, my Samsung Galaxy 8.9 is about as good as it gets (size, weight and usability trade-off) in my view but perfectly good for media consumption which is why e-book-readers are generally 6" or 7".
      
      Apple's happy as long as it means people are holding off buying from Amazon or Google.
      
      1 0
      1. Tuesday 17th July 2012 11:58 GMT vic 4
        
        i-Book
        
        Great idea, if it was just called an ipad there is less likely a fanboi might buy it if they already have a larger one. But make it loook like a different product and they'll all want one.
        
        0 1
    2. Tuesday 17th July 2012 17:48 GMT Anonymous Coward
      
      iPad is suited to content creation
      
      PMSL, did you manage to type that with a straight face?
      
      1 0
3. Tuesday 17th July 2012 15:04 GMT Anonymous Coward
  
  @ An0n C0w4rd
  
  * will need REDOING
  
  or
  
  will need TO BE redone.
  
  Let's go to the effort of forming complete sentences, shall we?
  
  1 2
Monday 16th July 2012 23:17 GMT Dan Dyer

Jobs' argument about 7-inch touch screens being too small to use effectively doesn't make any sense when everybody is already happily using much smaller screens on their phones.

17 6
1. Monday 16th July 2012 23:38 GMT Anonymous Coward
  
  But people don't do the same kind of stuff on phones and tablets. At least I don't.
  
  9 1
  1. Tuesday 17th July 2012 12:50 GMT daiakuma
    
    Depends on what phone you're using. Ask a Galaxy Note owner.
    
    0 0
  2. Tuesday 17th July 2012 15:22 GMT Mark .
    
    Well, some people might not do the same thing on a 10" tablet as they do on a 4" phone/tablet.
    
    But then, what was Jobs saying? "You need a 10" tablet to do things that you can do on a 10" tablet"? Well, thanks for that marvellous insight! The point is that smaller tablets are still useful, whether it's 9", 7" or 4-5".
    
    1 1
2. Monday 16th July 2012 23:44 GMT Sean Timarco Baggaley
  
  Steve Jobs made the crucial point that screen size dictates UI design, and this is crystal clear on the iOS platforms: a "universal" app that runs on both iPhone and iPad has two different GUIs, not just one.
  
  Contrast with Android where many app developers simply stretch their small smartphone GUIs up to fit a larger tablet display, with no other concession to the display's size and its opportunities for providing a richer, more streamlined, user experience.
  
  Steve Jobs nailed Apple's design philosophy with this one paragraph:
  
  "You're looking at it wrong. You're looking at it as a hardware person in a fragmented world. You're looking at it as a hardware manufacturer that doesn't really know much about software, who doesn't really think about an integrated product, but assumes the software will somehow take care of itself."
  
  Hardware without software is just a brick. Software without hardware is just bits in the aether. You cannot separate the two during the design phase for a product. This has ALWAYS been Jonathan Ive's design approach and neither Ive nor Jobs have ever made a secret of this, despite their competitors' best efforts to jam their fingers in their ears and sing "La-la-la! We're not listening!"
  
  Again: Apple have never made any secret of their holistic, unified hardware-and-software-combined design approach. Ever. Even Microsoft have finally twigged that it makes sense to control both aspects of the design instead of just the one. They've since had a roaring success with their games consoles, and I wouldn't be at all surprised if their "Surface" tablets do better than expected too.
  
  The IT industry's old guard—including the crusty beardos in the IT media—are still obsessing over raw technical specifications, feature bullet-lists (utterly ignoring their usability, which is a damned sight more important than their mere inclusion), pointless benchmarks, and other such nerdy bollocks. So much for being progressive: there are more conservatives in the IT industry than there are in the British Tory Party.
  
  34 8
  1. Tuesday 17th July 2012 00:50 GMT Darren 12
    
    I agree with some of what you have said but I'd like to point out that Android has very good tools for handling different screen sizes and pixel density, and since Honeycomb has had "fragments" for allowing the different phone/tablet GUIs that you are referring to. There's no doubt that fragments in particular are underutilised at the moment though and this could be attributed to the fact that Android share of the 9-10" tablet market is not really worth targetting yet. And sure, it's best if one company controls both hardware and software, assuming that that one company excels at both.That was definitely the case 5 years ago when Apple clearly had the best hardware/software combination in phones and is still true today in 9-10" tablets.
    
    But for me personally the hardware/software experience of many Android phones (Samsung Galaxy S3, HTC One X) is superior to the iPhone so I don't believe that your theory still holds true. Sometimes having a company that makes great hardware (like Samsung or HTC) paired with a company that makes great software (Google, at least since ICS) can deliver the best product. Of course, this is based on personal opinion but like many Android users, I previously owned an iPhone so feel qualified to make an educated (personal) comparison.
    
    10 2
    1. Tuesday 17th July 2012 05:53 GMT Lusty
      
      @Darren 12
      
      "But for me personally the hardware/software experience of many Android phones (Samsung Galaxy S3, HTC One X) is superior to the iPhone"
      
      The problem here is that they didn't design those phones, they tried EVERY combination until they found one that wasn't crap, and they did it at huge cost to end users who kept buying phone after phone in the hope that maybe, just maybe, the next one won't be unusably slow.
      
      5 8
      1. Tuesday 17th July 2012 15:32 GMT Ian Johnston
        
        Re: @Darren 12
        
        Perhaps. But then, any iPhone user wanting a good, fast, useable, flexible device will already have bought at least three of them, and will probably have their name down for an iPhone 5 already.
        
        1 0
    2. Tuesday 17th July 2012 15:28 GMT Mark .
      
      I agree with most your comment, but:
      
      "That was definitely the case 5 years ago when Apple clearly had the best hardware/software combination in phones"
      
      Really? The first Iphone lacked 3G support (hardware); couldn't do apps or even copy/paste (software). There was no "clear" about it - best is a matter of opinion here, and based on sales, most people have the opinion that the best was elsewhere.
      
      0 1
  2. Tuesday 17th July 2012 10:04 GMT Anonymous Coward
    
    Sorry
    
    Sorry old chap, Jobs was living in the past. Things have moved on.
    
    1 3
  3. Tuesday 17th July 2012 12:14 GMT vic 4
    
    android ... simply stretch their small smartphone GUIs
    
    I know this was only a small part of your post but felt inclined to comment.
    
    While there are certainly apps that do this, this is not an android issue, only a developer one. Even Steve Jobs didn't think much of ios developers capabilities/attitudes "developers aren't going to deal real well with all these different-size products", which I took to mean people are just going to stretch their UIs too.
    
    Both android and iOS have plenty of features to support mutli size UIs, and not just resizing bits, but providing completely GUIs for different sizes (although for an app with a truely dynamic UI I'd much prefer to develop for android). This is not just a mobile issue. On desktop apps how many people have struggled with fixed sized dialogs (I'm looking at you here microsoft), or information overload on small screens.
    
    There is no reason at all the same app can not target multple devices based on screen size alone*. Any deficiencies in the apps user experience are the designers/developers. * Ok, there are some applications, but assuming the device is large enough to be practical, which I guess was SJ's main point.
    
    1 0
  4. Tuesday 17th July 2012 15:26 GMT Mark .
    
    "Contrast with Android"
    
    Not true, there are plenty of Android apps that have larger screen versions.
    
    You're right that Apple users for often get special attention with special Ipad and Iphone versions, where as Android users don't, but that's not a criticism of Android, it's a criticism of the way that the media and companies unfairly cater for Apple users, despite being a smaller platform.
    
    If, e.g., Sky have an Iphone and Ipad app, but only have an "Android" app, that's not because Apple or Jobs are great, or Google are bad. It's because Sky are unfairly catering for Apple users over Android users (though I suppose Android users should be thankful to get support at all, when most platforms get none - Apple are always unfairly catered for first, despite never having been the largest platform in handheld devices).
    
    0 0
  5. Tuesday 17th July 2012 15:30 GMT Ian Johnston
    
    That's lovely, but last time I looked, Apple made laptops and desktops witha variety of screen sizes, resolutions and aspect ratios without coming over all precious about it. Yes of course software developers need to take account of the various display possibilities (whichever cretins wrote the National Rail Android app, the one which switches into portrait mode for some screens even when the device is being used in landscape, I'm looking at you) but that doesn't mean it can't be done perfectly well.
    
    Apple's unified hardware and software approach worked very well in the original Mac days, but soon failed as other manufacturers and developers got their joint and several acts together. It seems reasonable to expect that this will also happen on tablets, as it already has on phones - iPhones are now the commodity smartphone and suffering from a badly dated and inflexible interface.
    
    I think you nail it with your comment on "the design phase of a product". iPhones and iPads are long, long past their design phases, and it makes no sense to attempt to maintain restrictions now which were useful then. It's generally only when systems are allowed to develop after launch that they succeed long term.
    
    0 0
3. Tuesday 17th July 2012 00:04 GMT honkhonk34
  
  One size fits all?
  
  I think the 7-inch tablet size is an excellent one, myself.
  
  It's portable enough to whip out of a pocket, check something and put back within 15 seconds - as accessible and transportable as a phone - where as I find a full 10-inch screen too big for any of my pockets - digging the larger tablet out the bag is fine but it's simply not as accessible as a smaller tablet.
  
  I think there's a good place for a 10-inch tablet in the home (as a living-room device, say) but I feel the 7-inch form factor has greater utility for travel. If I was travelling and felt a need for the screen-real estate, processing power, etc offered by a 10-inch tablet, I'd use my laptop instead and do it properly. I'd have to dig that out my bag just as I would with a 10-inch tablet, anyway!
  
  8 1
  1. Tuesday 17th July 2012 08:20 GMT Anonymous Coward
    
    Re: One size fits all?
    
    Nobody ever suggested that a 10" tablet is a pocketable device.
    
    Remember Palmtop computers and PDAs? these were the mobile computers of the 90s and early 00s. They're the same size as smartphones are now, so these are the portables people used to use.
    
    People carry laptops around, but nobody ever suggested that a laptop is pocketable either. People do carry bags around sometimes.
    
    0 1
4. Tuesday 17th July 2012 08:16 GMT Giles Jones
  
  Wrong. Since the OS and software on a phone has been written its size in mind.
  
  If you take the existing iPad 10" where the software has been designed for its screen then load that software onto a 7" device then you'll find many things will be hard to press.
  
  0 1
  1. Tuesday 17th July 2012 09:03 GMT jubtastic1
    
    Actually
    
    They'll be exactly as hard to press as they are on an iPhone, as they're just going to use 3GS screens cut to 1024x768, which shockingly works out to a 7.8" iPad, and given current iPad apps are designed around the iPhone's 44 pixel touch targets it means the buttons will be rendered on an iPad mini at exactly the same size as they are on an iPhone.
    
    The thing that strikes me though, is that a 4:3 8" display doesn't sound very pocketable, even after losing the bezel on two of the sides in comparison to a 16:9 7" display.
    
    1 0
Monday 16th July 2012 23:17 GMT jnffarrell1

Steve Jobs was sandbagging Fibonacci

Fibonacci said natural sizes follow the golden ratio, discovered by the Greeks. As flowers and children evolve sizes add up: 3, 5, 8, 13. Starting from the natural size for a 13" Mac Book, and a 3" phone, Jobs could have build a 5" device that adults could consult, or a hand held 7" mobile laptop replacement that adults could consult instead of toying around with fashionable devices for children (twits and facebookistas).

Rather than lead the world into the mobile, knowledgeable, multiple sensory, info devices for doing real work. Jobs built toys for video, games, and gossip girls. Microsoft is flattering Jobs by copying his errors.

2 13
1. Tuesday 17th July 2012 15:13 GMT Anonymous Coward
  
  Re: Build
  
  The past tense of build is BUILT.
  
  1 2
Monday 16th July 2012 23:55 GMT aaaa

If a 7" device is not an iPhone and not an iPad - what is it?

So if I don't argue with Rik Myslewski's summary, or SJ's original comments - then I have to assume that the 7" device is not an iPhone or an iPad but something else.

What could it be?

Maybe an iPod?

I already use: Kindle (orig white), iPad, iPhone and MacBook for different tasks. The iPad I actually use the least of the four. For entertainment I probably use the Kindle the most (ok I like to read fiction), followed by the iPhone (sports scores, news, a little reading when I caught in a delay without the Kindle).

If the 7" device is not an iPhone and not an iPad - I'm betting it's a kindle. Optimised for the 'newsstand' and 'books' apps and not much else. I tried reading a book on the iPad (a freebie at Christmas from iTunes by Jo Nesbro) and it almost broke my wrist. A 10" device is just too heavy for reading for hours at a time. The kindle is ideal.

Do I think Apple can come up with a 7" device light enough for me to replace my Kindle. No. I even tried the B&N Nook Color - still too heavy IMHO.

But I'm guessing the 7" device is an iPod.

2 0
1. Tuesday 17th July 2012 09:35 GMT Anonymous Coward
  
  Re: If a 7" device is not an iPhone and not an iPad - what is it?
  
  It's a GiPod touch!
  
  *ahem*
  
  0 0
2. Tuesday 17th July 2012 10:10 GMT Adam Nealis
  
  Re: If a 7" device is not an iPhone and not an iPad - what is it?
  
  "But I'm guessing the 7" device is an iPod."
  
  It might just be the remote control for the iTV
  
  1 0
3. Tuesday 17th July 2012 12:21 GMT Lallabalalla
  
  Re: If a 7" device is not an iPhone and not an iPad - what is it?
  
  It's an iPod, obvs, because all their devices do that by default. But that's *too obvious. It's going to be a Kindle-killer: books/movies principally, games of course - something you can hold comfortably with one hand while straphanging on the daily commute. And do a bit of email/facebooking on should the mood take you.
  
  What it won't be for is editing movies/garageband/documents ie any real productivity, because you can do that palavah once you get where you're going, on your nice proper computer or work-grade tablet. Pure entertainment, my dear! Fun. Remember fun??
  
  0 0
Tuesday 17th July 2012 01:37 GMT Fill

Developers, Developers, Developers!

Initially Jobs didn't think an app store would even fly and had serious doubts that enough quality developers would be on board. I think that might be why he didn't want to potentially frustrate developers by having too many distinct hardware platforms (at least off the bat). But now, the iPad might have even exceeded Jobs expectations in sales and there's plenty of developers chomping at the bit to develop for a new form factor if there is, indeed, one in the works.

0 0
1. Tuesday 17th July 2012 08:19 GMT Anonymous Coward
  
  Re: Developers, Developers, Developers!
  
  > chomping at the bit
  
  champing at the bit
  
  1 0
  1. Tuesday 17th July 2012 08:38 GMT BorkedAgain
    
    Re: Developers, Developers, Developers!
    
    > > chomping at the bit
    
    > champing at the bit
    
    Chumping at the butt
    
    2 0
    1. Tuesday 17th July 2012 09:03 GMT Anonymous Coward 15
      
      Re: Developers, Developers, Developers!
      
      > > > chomping at the bit
      
      > > champing at the bit
      
      > Chumping at the butt
      
      What what
      
      1 0
Tuesday 17th July 2012 01:37 GMT qwiksilver

Ummmm Yeah. Right.

So explain why I chose a Kindle Fire over an iPad. Oh yeah, because an iPad didn't fit in my purse. If I wanted to carry around a bulky piece of electronics I have a 13" Mac Laptop. Jobs got this one wrong.

2 2
1. Tuesday 17th July 2012 02:47 GMT Brett Weaver
  
  Re: Ummmm Yeah. Right.
  
  I want a 7" tablet with a dual beam projector and Kinnect - like detector so I can manipulate a projected image.
  
  0 1
  1. Tuesday 17th July 2012 09:05 GMT Anonymous Coward
    
    Re: Ummmm Yeah. Right.
    
    And I want a house made of gold and a harem of big-breasted strippers ready to service me at any hour of the day.
    
    2 0
2. Tuesday 17th July 2012 02:56 GMT Tom 35
  
  Re: Ummmm Yeah. Right.
  
  I've got a Nexus 7 on order. I was offered a used iPad 2G by a co-worker who lined up for the "new" ipad but decided it was too big. Would have liked an SD slot but otherwise the Nexus is just about what I was waiting for.
  
  2 0
  1. Tuesday 17th July 2012 21:00 GMT Anonymous Coward
    
    Re: Ummmm Yeah. Right.
    
    "Would have liked an SD slot but otherwise the Nexus is just about what I was waiting for."
    
    You could get a Nook Color and then get a CyanogenMod SD card here...
    
    http://n2acards.com/
    
    0 0
3. Tuesday 17th July 2012 09:21 GMT JDX
  
  Jobs got this one wrong.
  
  Except that the expensive, cumbersome 10" iPad sells more than all 7" tab manufacturers combined :)
  
  I have no issue with a 7-8" tablet... his arguments have some sense but remember things change and those comments were from a while ago.
  
  2 1
Tuesday 17th July 2012 05:19 GMT Munkstar

Edge to edge

Take the bezel away and you have smaller iPad.

0 0
1. Tuesday 17th July 2012 09:29 GMT Anonymous Coward
  
  Re: Edge to edge
  
  "Take the bezel away ...." .... then you'd definitely have to "hold it the right way"
  
  1 0
Tuesday 17th July 2012 06:14 GMT Steve I

Perhaps not 7"...

Current rumours point to a 7.85" form factor. Coupled with the 4:3 aspect ratio andthis gives you 66% of the current iPads screen area, not 45%. (Apparently, as I haven't done the maths)

http://www.macrumors.com/2012/07/10/why-apples-7-85-inch-ipad-mini-isnt-a-7-inch-tablet/

Steve

2 0
1. Tuesday 17th July 2012 07:39 GMT ThomH
  
  Re: Perhaps not 7"...
  
  When two devices are the same aspect ratio you can just divide the one diagonal by the other and square what you get — that makes 65.49% in my book.
  
  Doing it all at length, a 7" 16:9 screen has a width of about 15.5cm and a height of 8.7cm. Surface area is about 135 square centimetres.
  
  A 9.7" 4:3 screen has a width of about 19.7cm and a height of about 14.8cm. So surface area is about 291.6 square centimetres.
  
  A 7.85" 4:3 screen is approximately 16cm by 12cm, for a surface area close to 192 square centimetres.
  
  So the 7" is about 46% as large as the 9.7" and 70% as large as the 7.85". The 7.85" is about 42% larger than the 7" and almost 66% as large as the 9.7". The 9.7" is about 117% larger than the 7" and 52% larger than the 7.85".
  
  So that no doubt clears everything up!
  
  1 0
Tuesday 17th July 2012 06:31 GMT Anonymous Coward

What's 7 inches good for?

Reading/watching movies.

Alot of people want to do this and will do this on a $200 device that's light enough to comfortably use for these purposes (some people, like my wife, find the iPad is just too heavy).

Now if Apple could reduce the weight of the iPad to that of the Nexus 7 and still sell it for $200 with a 10 inch screen, then Jobs would be right.

1 0
Tuesday 17th July 2012 07:31 GMT Anonymous Coward

Reality distortion

As always, in these interviews, Jobs is applying his reality distortion trick. He's so convincing that he believes it himself and manages to convince others he's right.

The 'sandpaper fingers' comment is just silly and it's contradicted as soon as he mentions users with smartphones, which have tiny screens by comparison.

We manage to cope with those screens just fine.

The problem with tablets that are 7" isn't anything to do with their size, it's simply that they haven't managed to make a large enough dent in Apples leadership, because, lets face it, they are mostly inferior products.

It remains to be seen whether the Nexus 7 has the right price point and a slick enough interface to convince those who find iPads too expensive to warrant a purchase, or, in fact, wonder why they would even need a tablet device in the first instance.

There are plenty of us out there who still question whether tablets are worth bothering with in their current iteration.

All the people I know who have bought iPads rave about them, but I rarely, if ever, see them using the device.

The answer is always "I surf the web on the couch while watching TV" - ok, I can see some value there, but not enough to warrant a £400+ price tag!

So now we have what looks like a decent 7" tablet with a £160 price tag hitting the market - I tell you what, *now* I'm interested.

7 0
1. Tuesday 17th July 2012 09:23 GMT JDX
  
  Re: Reality distortion
  
  So in that case, Apple SHOULD launch a 7" tablet because most people them aren't anti-Apple, they just want a 7" iPad and are forced to find an approximation elsewhere.
  
  0 1
2. Tuesday 17th July 2012 15:00 GMT TheOtherHobbes
  
  Re: Reality distortion
  
  I probably spend a few hours a day on my iPad all the time. It's perfect for browsing and book reading, and it's also not bad - but not so perfect - for music, video and photo editing.
  
  I can't see an 8" tablet being nearly as useful for any of the above. Text is going to be too small, the UI is going to be fiddly, and the size is a bad compromise between pocket and briefcase.
  
  Unless it's tied to specific content, an 8" would be a me-too product - which is exactly what Jobs was trying to avoid.
  
  I don't doubt it would sell, and there might even be a pick-up for OS X laptop sales as a result.
  
  But it's not a particularly elegant or clever thing to be putting out.
  
  0 2
  1. Tuesday 17th July 2012 15:34 GMT JDX
    
    Re: Reality distortion
    
    "I probably spend a few hours a day on my iPad all the time. It's perfect for browsing and book reading, and it's also not bad - but not so perfect - for music, video and photo editing.
    
    I can't see an 8" tablet being nearly as useful for any of the above"
    
    I'm not sure why not. An 8" tablet has a bigger screen than a Kindle so as a paperback replacement it's just fine. For music the screen isn't relevant and for personal video watching, just move it slightly closer to your eyes!
    
    For real work it could suffer a lot but that's not what most people use them for.
    
    0 1