Musing on Apple 2013

[afv011]

Originally Posted by leebase

Of those that are great, they are redesigned and built for the tablet size on Android, just like with iPad apps.

They are not, they target the 3 buckets. If you pay attention, you'll see that there is a single binary file that runs on all devices, and adjust the layout based on the physical dimensions of the device it's running on, they are not "redesigned for the tablet size", they are designed to cope with an array of sizes.

Anyway, I have better things to do that teach Android development, and it's obvious that for some folks "ignorance is bliss" certainly applies, so have it your way.

[jbjb]

Originally Posted by afv011

If you pay attention, you'll see that there is a single binary file that runs on all devices, and adjust the layout based on the physical dimensions of the device it's running on, they are not "redesigned for the tablet size", they are designed to cope with an array of sizes.

It's not clear what the "single binary file" has to do with the argument. iOS apps are frequently also a single binary file which runs on all devices, displaying the appropriate UI on each device.

/JB

[ilovejedd]

Originally Posted by tubemonkey

Apple is hung up on thinness, smaller sizes, and super light weight by choice; not by necessity. As such, those parameters delay the addition of technological advances and hamstring their devices. My iPod touch 4 has a horrible rear cam. Why? because Apple made it too thin. That precluded the use of the cams used in the iPhone 3GS or 4.

With Apple it's form first, function second.

Frankly, I think the bigger reason for not including the "nice" camera in the iPod Touch line has more to do with profit margins than design considerations. Not only does Apple save a few bucks on camera hardware, it also gives consumers greater incentive to spend a bucket load on the significantly more expensive iPhone.

As for the retina display Mini (or lack thereof), I don't quite agree with you. First, Apple would need mass production of 7.9" retina displays. At the time the original Mini was released, I doubt screen manufacturers can get the yields high enough. Second, while I don't mind a chunkier tablet, the additional weight that a bigger battery would add is non-trivial. What's the point of releasing a 7.9" iPad Mini if it's going to be just as heavy as the 9.7" iPad? Personally, I'd prefer the weight of tablets to go down further (around 200g or e-ink reader-level).

Originally Posted by Jessica Lares

I'm not carrying a stupid purse just to have a huge phone. I only have one to carry a few notebooks, sharpies, pens, and sticky notes in it to begin with, and I only carry it once a week. If a phone doesn't fit in my pocket, I'm not buying it.

Waste of money purses are.

It's either a 4" phone, or I'm buying used ones off eBay for the rest of my life if I have to.

I fondly remember the opening to the Flintstones cartoon from when I was growing up in the 1960s. Fred orders a rack of Brontosaurus ribs at the drive-in restaurant. They are so big that his car tips over on its side! that seems to me where we are heading with these oversized phones that don't know what they want to be--a phone, a tablet, a phablet, etc. After a phone gets beyond the 4" to 4.5" screen size, it is getting to big for my pants. To keep my pants from falling down from the oversized phone weight and size, I will either have to tighten my belt until my eyes bulge out like Marty Feldman's did, or buy a set of suspenders.

[SeaKing]

Originally Posted by tubemonkey

Apple is hung up on thinness, smaller sizes, and super light weight by choice; not by necessity. As such, those parameters delay the addition of technological advances and hamstring their devices. My iPod touch 4 has a horrible rear cam. Why? because Apple made it too thin. That precluded the use of the cams used in the iPhone 3GS or 4.

With Apple it's form first, function second.

Does the 4" model, gen 5 have a better camera?

[SeaKing]

Originally Posted by afv011

How will they spin that one up when they come out with their phablet? 3.5" was the holy grail of screen sizes as that was as far as your thumb could reach, but it turns out that was incorrect, 4" is the new holy grail. For how much longer?

Probably until the 5" comes out.
They will probably add another $100 to the cost too.

[SeaKing]

Originally Posted by afv011

The same was said about 3.5". Market pressure is the key here, if they're losing customers to other manufacturers based on their stubbornness to stick to "one size fits all" mentality, then maybe they'll have to move with the times and offer a larger screen size or maybe, God forbid, a choice to customers between 2 or more sizes.

That is sorta like a thought I had.

Who would fault Apple for offering 2 sizes of an iPhone or iPod.
Say a 3.5" legacy size device for some and a larger 4" or 5" for the new crowd in town.
I don't know what combination would cover the most people.
a 3.5 and 4" offering or a 3.5" and 4.5" set, or a 3.5 and 5" pair, or a 3.5, 4, and 5 inch group.
The hardware insides can be similar, and only the size different. Shouldn't be hard to do that and little more design except for the case and screen.

[afv011]

Originally Posted by SeaKing

That is sorta like a thought I had.

Who would fault Apple for offering 2 sizes of an iPhone or iPod.
Say a 3.5" legacy size device for some and a larger 4" or 5" for the new crowd in town.
I don't know what combination would cover the most people.
a 3.5 and 4" offering or a 3.5" and 4.5" set, or a 3.5 and 5" pair, or a 3.5, 4, and 5 inch group.
The hardware insides can be similar, and only the size different. Shouldn't be hard to do that and little more design except for the case and screen.

I doubt they'll ever go back to 3.5", that's way too small, once you use larger screens, you just can't go back to anything smaller, it looks ridiculously small and cramped. If they offer 2 sizes, they'll have to be different enough to be able to co-exist, so I would say one size would stick with 4", with the other being 5" or larger.

[Jessica Lares]

4" is the perfect size. 3.5" is still good too, but too many apps now work better with the extra .5". My brother and I were playing a game one night, and I didn't realize that until I had to switch between the iPhone 4, my Galaxy S2, and the Kindle Fire. The iPhone 4 just didn't cut it.

And yeah, most apps are done in one universal binary. On Android, they have to make different image sizes depending on the DPIs. If they didn't do that, the icon would just be a little Android. Different binaries are usually to support older devices.

On the iPhone/iPad, they have a similar setup, I think it's that they have to use like indications that they're for the Retina displays and not the regular displays with something like "2x@". Older binaries weren't in use until like this past month when they announced they were letting people download older versions of software.

[frahse]

Originally Posted by afv011

I doubt they'll ever go back to 3.5", that's way too small, once you use larger screens, you just can't go back to anything smaller, it looks ridiculously small and cramped. If they offer 2 sizes, they'll have to be different enough to be able to co-exist, so I would say one size would stick with 4", with the other being 5" or larger.

afv011 and Jessica.

The 3.5" screen should be considered because of the large number of people including Jobs and the "old" Apple crowd that swore that 3.5" was the magical number.

""""DON"T FORGET THE MAGIC!""""

It would be interesting and very telling if Apple offered the 3.5" along with another size or two and nobody would buy the 3.5."

For that reason, I don't think Apple will ever offer it again. It would be embarrassing.

[afv011]

Originally Posted by Jessica Lares

4" is the perfect size.

That's obviously subjective. My present phone is 4.8" and I won't be getting anything smaller than that when it's time to update, I think that 5-5.5" is probably the sweet spot for me. At about 5" it's still pocketable (the bezels have been shrinking with newer models), and the screen is large enough so that checking news, reading books and browsing is comfortable.

[ilovejedd]

Looks like I'm in the minority as I actually prefer the older 3.5" iPhone form factor. I've got an iPhone 4 and 4S used as wifi only devices for reading with Stanza. Yes, Marvin's great but I've already got a 4K library in Stanza.

Surprisingly though, the 5" Sony Xperia Z actually feels quite comfy in my tiny hands. Waiting for a Google Play edition of that.

[frahse]

Originally Posted by afv011

That's obviously subjective. My present phone is 4.8" and I won't be getting anything smaller than that when it's time to update, I think that 5-5.5" is probably the sweet spot for me. At about 5" it's still pocketable (the bezels have been shrinking with newer models), and the screen is large enough so that checking news, reading books and browsing is comfortable.

The GodFather said that "it was all personal." (subjective)

[frahse]

This evening, I checked my stock portfolio. Besides the stocks I have actually invested in, I also keep some there that I am considering for investment or at least am interested in for one reason or another.

Apple was up. (Pretty obvious if you think about it.)

[tubemonkey]

Originally Posted by SeaKing

Does the 4" model, gen 5 have a better camera?

It does; but only for the 32GB and 64GB versions. When Apple added the 16GB version to the lineup, they stripped the cam out.