Tony got to the story 2 hours before you Anna:
Sample screens for a seven-inch Apple iPad have been delivered for testing, according to Taiwanese manufacturing bible Digitimes. That means that production lines could start knocking out baby fondleslabs as early as June. Citing unnamed "industry sources", as it usually does, Digitimes states that the 7.85-inch iPad will be …
Your bike is metric???
Dunno what country you're in, but I'm in Finland. About as metric as can be. Yet, my bike tyres are measured in INCHES (24"), and the wheelnuts are WHITWORTH!!! **
Bike* is of Finnish design, but nowadays made in Taiwan...Go figure!
I'm seldom motivated to post comments on articles, but there is something about your choice of language I find pretty distasteful.
I'm all for a robust discussion of Steve Jobs' performance as a CEO and the product decisions he made. He did some great things, he did some really daft things. However, I feel your line about 'being unable to make executive decisions dying due to having died of cancer' comes across as making a cheap gag at the expense of someone having gone through a very terrible experience.
Currently in the process of dying from cancer and take no issue with the comment, if I did I would not be browsing this fine site anyway.
It would be good to meet up with Steve up there and report on a smaller iPad, I would just have to stand well clear!
Agreed. One can only hope that Anna has no relatives that have suffered from or are dying of cancer because this tasteless headline takes the f***ing biscuit.
In fact the whole thing is a trolly bitch about Apple.
"Indeed The Register predicted this move after the arrival of the first iPad. Sadly, we didn't patent the idea."
I think you have to actually do something to get a patent. Don't think you could look at a leading device and say "like that but in yellow, or like that but smaller." I can see that you are trying to hint at Apple patenting everything but that was a dumb comment.
One other point. Digitimes track record on Apple has been pretty abysmal. They are the News of the World of tech reporting, a place that with this article, you are only a couple of places above.
Unfortunately everyone is biting this news flash from DigiTimes. Even the more established Apple rumour sites are buying it (see macrumours.com for example). They know the unreliability of DigiTimes, but still. Anyway, why would a comment of SJ saying "no" simply to an iPad because they think its a personal CEO choice rather than a company choice because a smaller iPad would have consequences on the product line and software involved.
I'm sure SJ did leave behind some decisions already made before he handed the CEO to Mr.Cook. They'll be stuck in the mud and will happen (most probably the next 2 to 3 generations of products at a guess).
I'm sure Paris is as clueless to why SJ jabs are being made in vain.
"I think you have to actually do something to get a patent. Don't think you could look at a leading device and say "like that but in yellow, or like that but smaller.""
Come on over to the US, you'll see it's a bit different over here.
I wonder why all those people who found parts of this article to be distasteful, flippant, etc. really think they're offended.
My Dad (i.e. someone I knew personally) died of cancer, and I have no objections to the article's headline or to the line about 'being unable to make executive decisions' (thought that was quite good, actually), and think it's in keeping with the style that I'd expect from El Reg.
Get over it.
This is the Reg, kiddo, not Feministe -- "I found it offensive" isn't going to shut anyone up around here. Instead, it's going to make us wonder how it is that you get through life if you can't deal with low-level shit like this without whining about it.
For Christ's sake, either go away and complain somewhere that isn't stuffed full of unsympathetic bastards like me, or grow some hair on your balls and shoot back. Spitting pablum all over your bib impresses no one.
Really? That's nice.
As a child I got to watch one grandmother die a slow and painful death of lung cancer, during most of which time she was on a feeding tube because of the damage radiation treatments had done to her esophagus.
Not too long ago my other grandmother, a devout Roman Catholic who as best I can tell feared nothing in eighty years of life save losing her mind before she died, died of glioblastoma multiforme, which killed her just slowly enough to destroy her faculties first, and which destroyed her faculties just slowly enough so she was able to tell it was happening.
If you're thinking I can easily afford to be so awful because I must simply have never been touched by horror, well, you're wrong about that, but that's okay; I'm sure you're wrong about lots of other things, too. I'm being such a bastard because I think it's shameful, or certainly at least ought to be, to take one's experience of horror and try to shut up somebody else with it, not because it is doing one any actual harm to hear what that other is saying, but simply because most people are too kind to try to counter an argument from personal horror, because such arguments make their proponents look like damaged people not in need of further difficulty -- which, of course, in most company, makes such argumentation an excellent stick for beating people into behaving more how you like. Having spent several years camp-following the feminist blogosphere, where to call such behavior 'rampant' understates the case by a considerable degree, I find myself bereft of further patience for it, and I don't see any particular reason not to say so.
Does that make me a bastard? Oh, no! However shall I bear the ignominy?
To paraphrase you
This is the Reg, kiddo, not Feministe -- "I think it's shameful" isn't going to shut anyone up around here. Instead, it's going to make us wonder how it is that you get through life if you can't deal with low-level shit like this without whining about it.
For Christ's sake, either go away and complain somewhere that isn't stuffed full of unsympathetic bastards like me, or grow some hair on your balls and shoot back. Spitting pablum all over your bib impresses no one
I think the man would've made a fine emperor, as it happens, and I've watched several of my own relations die slowly and painfully of cancer, so it's not as though I don't know what the disease is about.
But do you see me dribbling about the Register's irreverence on the subject of his death? No. Not least because, if Jobs had had the sense to go straight to real medicine instead of wasting a large fraction of what time he had on pointless hippie bullshit, he'd probably have lived at least another half decade.
And, Jesus H. Christ, sjam, you registered on the site just to make that comment? You'd really do better to go back and weep over the Steve Jobs shrine at the foot of your bed, and leave the conversation here to those of us capable of interacting with one another on the level of grown adults who don't need to go sobbing to the whole world when somebody says something we don't like.
As I tried to make clear in my post, I feel ambivalent towards Steve Jobs. I would have posted the same opinion had a similar situation occurred with Steve Ballmer, Linus Torvalds or someone completely unknown.
I am in fact very fond of El Reg's irreverent style, it's what's made me an avid reader for over ten years now.
However, something can be both irreverent and also cheap, and I feel that the some of the language in this article can be viewed as just that. Usually El Reg's authors manage to combine irreverence with wit, and do not have to resort to making a gag out of the fact that someone's died of a serious disease.
I have no problem with El Reg's authors saying things I don't like or agree with. My motivation for posting was that I felt the author had stooped below the usually pretty high standard of humour and writing on the site. It just felt a bit primary school.
Lastly, I'm not sure it's fair to criticise me on the basis of my comment being a 'first post'. Everyone must have a 'first post' in order for there to be any comments at all.
Piss off. I thought it was simple a statement of fact, hes dead, and won't be controlling the process anymore. The story noted how he was opposed to it. Its just The Reg's style of pandering to both side of the Apple.
Before you get all bent, I had an 2 Relative die from it, a College mates' 6 yr old die from it, I just lost a family friend, only 16 yrs old, to it day as a matter of fact, and her mother currently has it. Stop looking for problems because its "politically" correct. Have a sense of humor, cause cancer patients tend to have it.
No one is out to get anyone.
If they price it to compete with the Kindle, then it must surely also eat into iPad sales - There will be people who'd buy a cheaper 7" one instead of the more expensive 10"er. And I'd bet that the lost revenue wouldn't be covered by the additional sales to people who would've bought a Kindle and/or weren't going to buy an iPad at the more expensive price point. And for that reason, I doubt it can be true.
Apple will not be trying to optimise their hardware revenue take. Sad for them they have to share some with poor Chinese folk. No, the iPad's function is as the portal to iTunes and ongoing and growing revenue from using the device.
They have dominant market share for ongoing services and products. They don't want to trade out more than they have to. So covering the bases and locking out the competition has to be the dominant strategy. Android is a real danger but one they have managed to contain so far in the fondleslab department.
If we assume that a 7" and a 10" iPad would cost pretty much the same to make, then a $200 reduction in pricepoint is essentially $200 of profits lost. I don't see anyone saving themselves $200 on an iPad only to then spend ~$700 on iTunes - such that Apple's 30% cut recovers them that $200 in profit.
Sure, you have to factor in the desire to lock out the competition, but, Jobs at least and maybe Apple as a whole, are arrogant enough to assume they have no competition. And I think the iPad market share backs that up. People want an iPad because it is an iPad, not because of what it does. If Samsung et al, actually stumble upon the killer app for the 7" form factor, and start eating into iPad sales, then we might see a smaller iPad, but not until, and I don't see any evidence of it happening either.
I found it reasonably straight to the point and innocuous.
I mean, what's different, "Monarch/President X's death clears way for reforms in blah blah blah".
Same thing 'innit?
Are you that sensitive? Oh... god I forgot, Steve Jobs is more than that....
...unless of course you are talking about the Kindle Fire. The pre Fire Kindles have a much better screen for reading text than the iPad. I have been able to take the Kindle down to the beach and read, where as the glare from the glass screen on the iPad means you will be looking for some shade. The Kindle screens are very much easier on the eye for long stints of reading too. They don't do colour and are a limited function device which is why they are so cheap and the battery lasts so long.
Once you introduce colour and make it a general purpose machine the price goes up and the battery life goes down.
Yeah but they're a bit shit - shit browser, shit battery, shit plastic case, hardly any memory, shit gesture system, no Google support, No GPS, etc, etc. People are buying them because they're cheap and that's because they have a subsidised price. Sooner or later that will have to end and then they'll go back to being exactly what they are - a mediocre tablet at an average price.
Remember 2007/2008? iPhone was to be programmed with HTML5; platform specific third party apps were the evil past, said Steve Jobs. And then came the App Store.
It's true a 7 inch iPad won't give you the same experience. But if you just want to control your Apple gadgets in the home, a 7 incher lying around is probably what you want.
If he were still here, SJ would be happy to launch a seven inch iPad. When the time is right.
Just because something's true one day doesn't mean it's true the next. And Steve Jobs knew that. and exploited it for all he was worth. You thought Apple was in one place? Turned out they were somewhere else entirely a few months later.
If you think that having the same pixel resolution on a 7.85" screen means that user interfaces designed for a 9.7" screen need no changes then you're clearly no user interface expert. Individual user interface elements would need to be almost 25% larger in pixels to have the same touch area — that's not the sort of amount you can just ignore and hope for the best; if you do then people will spend a lot of time missing what they're aiming for.
Looking at it another way: Samsung, Amazon, etc, have spent time ensuring their user interface is designed appropriately for their 7" devices. Apple can't afford not to.
Very much what I was going to say.
It's a close enough size that things would indeed pretty much look the same, but I think many people forget that with touch-based devices, you really need to consider the physical aspects of the design.
This is less of an issue with mouse-based systems as you're always operating on an abstraction of your hand-movement and pointer movement, that makes it easier to hit tiny targets. That said, old fixed layout 800x600 Windows applications can be almost unreadably small on a modern high-resolution laptop screen.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019