17 
In Apple’s earnings call yesterday, Tim Cook uttered something that is, frankly, stunning in its obliviousness:
Let me be clear. We would not make one of the seven-inch tablets. We don’t think they’re good products, and we would never make one. Not just because it’s seven inches but for many reasons. One of the reasons, however, is size.
Cook goes on to say that “The difference in just the real-estate size between the the 7.9 (almost 
versus the 7 is 35 per cent. And when you look at the usable area, it’s much greater than that. It’s from 50 to 67 per cent.” What is this “usable area,” exactly? Is he talking about the back of it? Like, it’s a solid surface you can use when you need to sign cheques? And how you add 0.9 inches and come away with 67 per cent more useable area is a conundrum that will have mathematicians scratching their heads for eons to come. Then he goes on:
“iPad mini is a fantastic product,” he continues, throwing back another stiff drink. “It’s not a compromised product like the 7-inch tablets. It’s in a whole different league.”
Are. You. Fucking. Kidding. Me. You just made a 7.9-inch tablet, and you’re dissing 7-inch tablets as compromised? Not only that, as we showed earlier, your 7.9-inch tablet has far fewer pixels than the competing 7-inch tablets! You’re cramming a worse screen in there, charging more, and accusing others of compromise? Ballsy.
Apparently that’s why you have to charge £110 more than the others.
So approximately £12.22 per tenth of an inch! Bargain!
“Hello this is apple. We just wanted to inform everyone that our shit don’t stink.”
the term Penis Envy comes to mind
Im figuring Tim Cook must have very small hands which is probably why Phil Schiller unveiled the iPad mini so he could hold it one handed
The screen wont be bad, I dont remember any one saying the iPad 2 screen was bad until the Retina came out, and most people cant tell the difference anyway. So the iPad mini should have a decent screen and Run all previous iPad apps without compromise.
Cook also needs to lay off the competition, they are going to sell these by the bucket load.
Like.
Translation “We would never dare make a 7″ tablet because Steve dissed them and we would be strung from the lampposts by his worshippers for going against the word of Jobs, thus we’ll add .9″ and call all smaller tablets compromised. Despite the fact we are using a two year old bit of kit that will save us a fortune in R&D costs we’ll still charge far more than the competition”
Tim Cook should write a book, I already came up with the title “How to Destroy and Company – For Dummies”
*a not and
I read somewhere that they couldn’t have made it 7″ anyway because of the way the apps scale. I would dig out the link but I actually have to do real work for once..
I read that too.
I’d be interested to read that.
I’m guessing it’s the aspect ratio, and the fact that by using the same resolution as the iPad 2 they maintain total compatibility. Anything else would require iPhone-5-esque alterations.
Thats exactly what I thought was the thinking behind that stupid 7.9 inch choice its practically the same size as a normal iPad, 7 inches is the sweet spot between a smart phone and a full sizes tablet.
I cant believe they compromised the design just to save face, added to that I cant believe the people at Apple today took what Jobs said literally, when Steve Jobs said 7 inch tablets weren’t any good he didn’t mean exactly 7 inches, he meant all tablets in that size area i.e. not full sized 9 inch tablets and above, he did after all use the term “compromised experience” implying all devices with a smaller screen were compromised in comparison.
I dont think there is any other reasons for the choice in size, scaling has nothing to do with the physical size of the display just the pixel resolution and aspect ratio of those pixels, theres no reason why they couldn’t make it 7inches at 1024*768 obviously theres no need to scale the app if the display is the same resolution regardless of physical size.
I assume one reason for the poor resolution is that Apple can make a retina iPad 2 mini next year once the iPad 3′s tech is 2 years old. They can then trot out the same “resolutionary” guff again.
I think the resolution choice is for developers otherwise the whole Apple eco system is going to get rather fragmented and all the apps are going to have black boarders until developers catch up. That being said I think the IPhone 5′s screen size was a poor choice just increasing the height and changing the aspect ratio causes more issues than it solves, if they had kept the same aspect ratio and made the screen wider as well then they could have automatically scaled apps up, until developers tweak their apps, they could have done the same with the iPad mini I guess.
My main issue is with the size 7.9 is just a little bit too big to be a mini tablet regardless of what Apple says. They are only explaining why they did what they did because they know they’ve made poor design choices, if the size was the correct choice there would be no need for explanations or justifications.
So if I assume that height and width of the screen are in the ratio 1024:768 (i.e. 1.33), then good old Pythagoras tells us that the dimensions of a screen with a 7.9 inch diagonal are 4.74 x 6.32 inches (screen size, not device size). This implies a screen area of 29.96 sq inches. Using the same assumptions for a 7 inch diagonal, the dimensions are 4.2 x 5.6 inches, implying an area of 23.52 sq inches.
Thus, the 7.9 inch screen gives us 27.4% more screen area than a 7 inch screen. So I can’t even get to the 35% increase in area he’s talking about, let alone 50-67%.
And doing the calculations on total device area rather than just screen area doesn’t explain things either.
Just goes to show most statistics are like hand puppets. Stick your hand far enough up them and you can make them say whatever the hell you want…
Is he trying to say that the iPad Mini is 35% bigger than the competing 7 inchers? (If so, why?)
Is he also trying to say that the usable area i.e the screen is 50% on whoever he’s benchmarking against but 67% on the Mini?
He’s saying that the iPad mini is only .9 inches bigger, but offers 35% more screen area. Except it doesn’t according to my numbers – its closer to 27%.
On the usable area, I thought he was saying the usable area is 50-65% bigger on the 7.9 inch screen, but that was clearly not true. If you interpret it your way (i.e how much of total screen estate is usable), then it still doesn’t work – the percentage of area used is 68% for the 7 inch, and 69% for the 7.9 inch (assuming similar proportioned devices, etc.).
Actually the 35% figure is right the nexus 7 has a different aspect ratio (1280 * 800 ie 1.6) which gives you a screen size of 5.93 * 3.7 inches = 22 sq inch.
(29.9 * 100 / 22) = 135.9 this means that the ipad mini screen has an area 35.9 larger than nexus 7.
(22*100/29.9) = 73.6 -> this means that the screen area of nexus 7 is 73.6 % the size of the ipad mini. Depends where you are looking from
Ah, that would make sense for the 35% number, although he seemed to be arguing against making the 7 inch himself, (which would mean keeping the 1.33 aspect ration), rather than comparing to the Nexus.
Still don’t get the 50-65% usable area though. For the nexus, based on your numbers, the screen is 60% of the total area, whereas it is 69% on the iPad mini.
Actally its not only the math comes in picture.
Android uses on screen controls, taskbar (or whatever you say for the top bar), tabs in browsing…
That takes a huge amount of screen area, and we can see much less of webpage are WRT the screen area.
Thus comparing the displayed webpage in portrait mode from android to ipad is around 50% more real estate.
the number increases if you view in landscape mode. (Its 16:10 vs 4:3)thus it comes around 65%.
This.
The UI controls are roughly the same size on both tablets, so the iPad has more screen space available to display data.
I’m actually with Tim here. I love my Nexus 7, but this is something I dislike about it. If you try to view a web site in landscape orientation, Chrome’s UI eats up about a third of the screen’s real estate. It feels like I’m reading the site through a letterbox.
That said, I still think 16:9 is a better aspect for 7-inch-ish tablets. The tablet needs to be narrow enough to grip in one hand, and the iPad looks a good deal wider than the N7, despite its skinny bezels. Google just need to do a better job of optimising the UI.
I’m with you on this one. I’ve been struggling for a reason as to why three ui buttons need so much space on screen on all the apps. They’re just wasting a load of screen real estate that I’m sure could be used pretty effectively.
Personally, this is why I’m a proponent of those three physical buttons under the screen that Google are so keen to consign to history. It’s not a popular view
.
Maybe those navigation buttons would eat up less space if they just stayed on the narrow edge of the screen, even in landscape orientation, like they do on the Kindle Fire. But hey, each to his own.
I was going to throw in the Pitagoras card but was already too late. Anyway marketing is a “math/physics/logic/etc independent area”.
Heh, who would have guessed Pythagoras would come in useful after A-Level maths…
I kid, I kid, I was horrible at maths.
That might be one very stiff drink indeed.
The same stuff these guys were drinking: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1HcSnoSjYw8&feature=player_embedded
Just when I think human stupidity won’t surprise me anymore,BAMMM, we are all doomed.
Jesus Christ on a bike, Apple is on cloud nine. It’s a ship that sinks from the head down
I seem to e one of the only ones on forums who actually likes the screen size of the new mini.
For the record before anyone calls me an apple fan boy, I just switched to android after having iphones since the first one came out and would never go back to an iPhone until the completely overhaul the home screens of iOS. I don;t want to see screens of boring icons, I want to be able to see sexy animated widgets with all my info, social sharing, news etc right there, that more importantly is CUSTOMISABLE (WinterBoard for jailbroken devices was cool, but so buggy!).
I was going to pick up a nexus 7 but the extra screen width of an iPad mini will make a considerable difference when viewing websites. As the more letter boxed dimensions of the nexus makes a big difference in general site size and readability when loaded full screen.
Perhaps that is what he is getting at by the extra ‘useable’ size they mention, the overal scalling up of a site with the extra width (proportionally)… still seems like a bit of a stretch though.
having said all that the fact a nexus is way more powerful, better screen res and the 32g is still hundreds of pounds cheaper than the 16gb mini is pretty crazy. But then the material use and design is a lot more sexy on the mini. I am considering one but would have to play with one in store first, as the ipad 2 screen just looks horrendous compared to modern devices and the competition now.
Ok, now that I’ve seen someone who likes the size, tell me, why would you buy a “mini” tablet (either 7 or 7.9)? It sounds like you like a larger screen where possible, so you would compromise on buying a mini over the full tablet for two possible reasons – a) It’s more portable, or b) It’s cheaper.
If it’s b), then the Nexas is better value surely (except for those who value the brand), and if its a), then the question is: is the 7.9 inche size provide sufficient “portability” for you? I’m genuinely curious, as I really don’t get the size Apple is chosen.
for me the iPad is cool, but it’s just not particularly comfortable to hold for too long as it’s a bit too big. I’d generally only use it when on the sofa or in bed, or perhaps on a long flight etc (so laid on a table or stand don’t really help) For games it’s really uncomfortable if using on screen dpads in the bottom corners, and to me at least feels unweighted as most of the weight is at the top of the screen.
But having used a nexus 7 I found it almost perfect, much more comfortable to hold, and in landscape mode was perfect, but the extra screen heigh would be even better (especially as it is considerable lighter). I completely agree it’s BY FAR the best value tablet out there for what you’re getting though, it’s an amazing tablet that I was going to buy (and still may – but will play with a mini before deciding).
The main thing that bugged be about the nexus was the fact that in portrait mode it was quite slim in width, especially for viewing websites. I ‘think’ (obviously would actually need to use one to be sure) that the extra width on the ipad would make quite a bit of a difference in web browsing considering the scaling up of the site as a whole.
I know there’s really not much in it between the two, but for what I would use it for, the extra screen size seems ideal, especially given the weight drawback of the ipad is not an issues as its that much lighter.
I’m not one of these nutters who would take it everywhere with them and look like a complete retard using it as a camera, so portability (other that wandering round the flat with it) isn’t a consideration at all for me.
They both have their own advantages, and I’m probably one of the minority that prefers small tablets to the 10 inch (even at the exact same price I would still prefer a slightly small one), but size wise at least it SEEMS to be ideal. I’ll hold off confirming that till I’ve actually got my hands on one and used it. But then maybe I’m just a ridiculously fussy fecker
Is Tim Cook actually Charlie Sheen in disguise?
“iPad mini is a fantastic product,” he continues, throwing back another stiff drink. “It’s not a compromised product like the 7-inch tablets. It’s in a whole different league. It’s powered by an alien brain and has tiger blood flowing through it.”
If he actually said that then I’d buy two.
but does it smell like sex panther