11–20 of 30 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
a 4.5" model is all but assured Citation? All the evidence I've seen points to a 4" model. http://www.cultofmac.com/177233/yet-another-4-inch-iphone-5-...
Sorry, you're right, it's 4" I was thinking of. At any rate, the point was that the phone display is going to increase in size.
Dominate every possible price range with a slightly more expensive and greatly superior product. Dominate the supply chain and maximize profits. People are willing to pay the $100 premium is Apple makes a better product (No, I don't want a iOS vs. Android discussion here).
I'd say, the 7.85" is coming out soon. Also, the PPI argument has been out through DaringFireball for months now. This isn't a recent find.
I don't see Apple being one to release the tablet just to compete. The 7" would eat into 10" sales and a new formfactor only adds another resolution that devs have to account for (unless the original iPad's resolution is effectively retina at a 7" size?). When it comes to portability, would 7" be that much more portable? I know people can put these in their pockets, but it's hardly practical. Ultimately, it doesn't q…
Part of the point of the article is that it would not really add another resolution that devs would have to account for. A 7.85" iPad could have the exact same resolution as a non-retina 9.7" iPad and still have the same pixel density as the iPhone. This would result in UI elements that would be no smaller than normal for the iPhone, making it relatively easy for existing iPad apps to run with no modification.
A 7.85" iPad could have the exact same resolution as a non-retina 9.7" iPad and still have the same pixel density as the iPhone.
I don't see Apple being one to release the tablet just to compete. The 7" would eat into 10" sales and a new formfactor only adds another resolution that devs have to account for (unless the original iPad's resolution is effectively retina at a 7" size?). When it comes to portability, would 7" be that much more portable? I know people can put these in their pockets, but it's hardly practical. Ultimately, it doesn't q…
Part of the point of the article is that it would not really add another resolution that devs would have to account for. A 7.85" iPad could have the exact same resolution as a non-retina 9.7" iPad and still have the same pixel density as the iPhone. This would result in UI elements that would be no smaller than normal for the iPhone, making it relatively easy for existing iPad apps to run with no modification.
I didn't make it clear, but I understand the author's talking about logical resolution. I'm wondering if the iPad (1024x768) resolution scaled to 7" would effectively be Retina based on Apple's definitions. He scaled it by a factor of the iPhone's logical PPI (not the Retina pixel density). If the resolution was scaled by the required PPI to create a retina display (at ~7"), would a 1024x768 display still work out to a physical size of approximately 7"?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
a 4.5" model is all but assured Citation? All the evidence I've seen points to a 4" model. http://www.cultofmac.com/177233/yet-another-4-inch-iphone-5-...
Right. In addition, the '7" iPad' is rumored to actually have a 7.85" screen, so that Apple would now have a 4" phone, an ~8" tablet, and a ~10" tablet. I'd say those devices are easily distinguished from one another.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Part of the point of the article is that it would not really add another resolution that devs would have to account for. A 7.85" iPad could have the exact same resolution as a non-retina 9.7" iPad and still have the same pixel density as the iPhone. This would result in UI elements that would be no smaller than normal for the iPhone, making it relatively easy for existing iPad apps to run with no modification.
Can you walk us through the math you did to arrive at the following conclusion? A 7.85" iPad could have the exact same resolution as a non-retina 9.7" iPad and still have the same pixel density as the iPhone.
- The original iPhone had a PPI of 163PPI
- The original iPad had a PPI of 132PPI
The 44x44 point recommendation was the same for the iPhone and iPad. So the minimal tappable element on the iPad happened to be physically bigger even though it was the same # of points.
A 7.85" iPad happens to have a PPI of 163PPI. (same as original iPhone)
So that means any UI element designed with a minimum of 44x44 points will still be as tappable on a 7.85" iPad as it was on the iPhone. If you see the PDF/actual-size file I linked in another comment, you'll see the UI elements on a 7.85" iPad are no smaller than elements on an iPhone.
actual math here: http://www.appadvice.com/appnn/2012/03/apple-has-163-reasons...
4(iPod touch and iPhone), 7.85, 9.7 = Apple trying to do to tablets what they did for MP3 players. Dominate every possible price range with a slightly more expensive and greatly superior product. Dominate the supply chain and maximize profits. People are willing to pay the $100 premium is Apple makes a better product (No, I don't want a iOS vs. Android discussion here). I'd say, the 7.85" is coming out soon. Also, th…
I don't see Apple being one to release the tablet just to compete. The 7" would eat into 10" sales and a new formfactor only adds another resolution that devs have to account for (unless the original iPad's resolution is effectively retina at a 7" size?). When it comes to portability, would 7" be that much more portable? I know people can put these in their pockets, but it's hardly practical. Ultimately, it doesn't q…
It would fit the pattern of the iPod if Apple started moving into the lower dollar ranges with new products. Since the article demonstrates that most apps will be fine, it seems like a reasonable win. The retina display is nice in the iPad 3rd generation, so they have a clear differentiator between models besides size.
That's probably the one argument that helps me understand and appreciate the reasoning for the 7" a bit more. However, I still consider the retina display a mandatory for all new* products that Apple releases
*where new is not a new revision of an existing device + form factor.
It feels like lazy logic, and until now Apple has never forced user apps at a lower physical size that targeted by the developper, at least on the iOS front. Good quality iphone and ipad apps are expected to be pixel perfect and thoroughly designed for the target device, and Apple pushed with all it's weight in this direction. It would be strange for apple to just say from now on "screw the physical size, who cares about interface details, they'll just learn to click better"
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It would fit the pattern of the iPod if Apple started moving into the lower dollar ranges with new products. Since the article demonstrates that most apps will be fine, it seems like a reasonable win. The retina display is nice in the iPad 3rd generation, so they have a clear differentiator between models besides size.
Ah. I never considered the parallels between the iPod device line. That's probably the one argument that helps me understand and appreciate the reasoning for the 7" a bit more. However, I still consider the retina display a mandatory for all new* products that Apple releases *where new is not a new revision of an existing device + form factor.