Apple making smaller iPad?
Is Apple already preparing a smaller version of the iPad? Will it be here by Christmas?
That sounds a lot like the concept for the original 9.7in-screen iPad if you ask us, but we’ll go along with what Kuo says as he follows up that ‘the HP Slate is unlikely to provide a competitive portable experience to the iPad since it uses an Intel processor which consumes more power.’ That pretty much fits what we expect of any slate-type device that uses conventional PC hardware and Windows 7 to be like. We’ve used UMPCs, after all.
Perhaps the reason for the new, smaller iPad is as a reaction to the less than stellar reviews of the iPad when it’s used as an eBook reader, one of its supposedly primary uses. For example, our compatriots on PC Pro say that the iPad is ‘far too heavy to comfortably read a book on’ at 680-720g (depending on whether you have the 3G module or not) when eBook readers typically weigh much less than 300g. Secondly, ‘the contrast … becomes uncomfortable after ten minutes of reading’ and the reflective TFT makes reading under bright lights tricky too.
Then again, Engadget says that the iPad ‘ didn't hurt our eyes to use this as a reading device.’ However, Engadget did also say that ‘we won't speculate on what prolonged use will feel like’ which suggests that War and Peace is still in its electronic bookshelf. The Telegraph reports that ‘the backlighting of Apple's pin-sharp display is going to cause a lot of tired eyes… and I don't think serious bookworms will be swayed to chose the iPad over the Kindle or a Sony Reader.’
The New York Times also agrees with our colleagues a couple of desks over, as its techy review says ‘you can’t read well in direct sunlight. At 1.5 pounds, the iPad gets heavy in your hand after awhile (the Kindle is 10 ounces). And you can’t read books from the Apple bookstore on any other machine — not even a Mac or iPhone.’ The Guardian also has issues with the iPad as an eReader, saying ‘The backlit screen doesn't come anywhere near the clarity of electronic ink, which means it's going to prove a lot harder on the eyes of bookworms(it's great for reading in bed, one Apple flunky told me, keen to stress the positive side).’
What do you think? Will the smaller size and weight of the rumoured new iPad make it the best eReader ever, or are you still unconvinced by the concept of tablet computing? Thoughts in the forums please!
Previous Article
82 Comments
Discuss in the forums Reply+1
What is wrong with paper after all? It's much more enjoyable thumbing through a book than holding a piece of plastic/aluminium for hours on end.
+2
I did mention this to Clive, but he'd already spent a lot of time in Photoshop making that picture :p
+3
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/1298388/iPoaoaoaoad.PNG
In other news, Steve Jobs lost a finger or two in the manufacturing process of the iPhoaoad. RIP Steve Jobs' pinkie.
In 3 years time I will laugh at this comment, just like I laugh at people who say "whats the point of an MP3 player, just use a CD player instead". The idea of taking a single eReader on holiday, or on the train, knowing that you have your whole library to choose from seems like a brilliant idea.
I still feel that no-one has developed the perfect eReader yet though. I am waiting for e-ink, touch screen, online access and the ability to view e-magazines as well as ebooks. I will not consider the ipad, regardless of its size and weight, because the most important thing about reading is that it should be fun. And 2 hours of having your retina's burnt out while angling the damn thing away from the sun doesn't sound like fun to me.
When it comes to large blocks of text anyway.
+1
+4
I still buy CDs. I just like them. Of course I rip them into digital formats, but I like holding a physical CD in my hands. Why do you think there are so many CD shops still in business?
My iPhone is lovely, but that's the only thing I think is usefull from Apple
Couldn't agree with you more, but you just completely proved the point, we moved from CD's to MP3's because they're smaller, easier to transfer/move around, just generally better, and yeah ok, CD's are better quality, but it takes somebody with a good ear for detail to notice the difference between 320kb and a CD, let alone FLAC, etc.
So, going back to this iPiddy, its not better, its not easier, and its definately not cheaper, so therefore a waste of time, hell if something better than reading a book comes along, then i'm all game, but as you pointed out, nobody has got it right yet. Apple need to get away from the english tourist approach (say it again but louder (or bigger in apples case)) and realise that the size is not why we wont be rushing to the shops to read the next Harry Potter book on a big slab.
ROFLMAO!!
Not quite. if you go out for the weekend you will definitely be listening to several songs and most likely of very dissimilar genres, but that's not the case when reading. How many times have you read 15 books in one weekend? Or how many times have you gone out and said "oh, I'm dying to read Book X but I'm stuck with Book Y since it's the one I'm currently in the middle of and didn't think of bringing another one"? I seriously don't think that's a very common scenario.
Apple, producing revolutionary products by forcing people to buy resized products.
+5
I dunno I carry a few books on holiday or business trips abroad
Would a kindle help depends on battery and wieght and viewing
If it strains eyes after 5mins not gonna work to well
as for ereaders replacing books I dout it, most people read to get away from technology and it's ilk, I know alot of people who read
and 0 want an kindle or any type of machine like it. Would take a major book release of harry potter sales level that is ebook only to really force any kind of shift I feel. They would also have to be priced alot cheaper than the books themselfs which authors won't e
want. I just can't see kindle and it's ilk ever taking off
I already know many people that have kindles and use them a lot. Most of them would not care for an iPad. They have no use for it and it overcomplicates what they need. The iPad is VERY heavy and bulky compared to the Kindle.
My Mom is 74 and has a Kindle and loves it. If there were any more to the Kindle than the book reader, it would just complicate things for her.
My wife has a Kindle as well and is often reading it just before bed while holding it in one hand. This would not happen with the iPad. I had her try it with my iPad and she thought it was just too bulky for the same use.
I've had the iPad for a week and I am having a hard time finding a reason to keep it. I'd guess it's going on eBay by next Monday.
The iBodyform's screen is just too reflective and the backlight too harsh to use it comfortably. Besides, I like books, I like browsing through bookshops (Borders RIP :(), you just don't get that browsing through iBooks or Amazon.
I also study frequently on my laptop for hours and don't find reading with strong backlight any more tiring than reading a normal book for hours. I guess it all depends on what people are used to...
Cheers
Most people will just want to read novels, though. Some research put a 300 page 6"x9" book at 441g. Pretty reasonable to expect your multi-hundred dollar reader to weight less.
Agreed,
Some medical books are absolute monsters (Anatomy! :(...), the iPad is nothing comapred to those. Even carrying 3 or 4 pocket sized versions is a hassle! I also spend a lot of time studying/reading an LCD screen and also don't seem to have any problems. Having a library of educational books on a fairly portable device such as the iPad seems like a good idea to me. Of course we are exceptions and the majority of people will find staring at a screen for extended periods of time hard to manage.
Ideally they'll be a screen out there which can be both vibrant and subtle on the eye. I'm hoping microsoft can pull this one off with the Courier. With the scrapbook kind of interface + eBooks, making notes will be an absolute sinch!
Ever taken any books with you?
How much space do half a dozen novels take up in your suitcase?
How much of your precious luggage allowance do the take?
My Sony eReader goes in my jacket pocket and with books loaded onto 4Gb SD cards I can take literally hundreds of books with me! I can decide, when I get there, which books to read, rather than being restricted to just those 'paper' books I thought to take with me.
as much as i had no idea what the use of the iPad was, i have even less of an idea what the use of this new gimmick is...
Try a Kindle. It's seriously exactly like reading a book.
Your negative opinion is rather astonishing seeing as your all geeks and techies.
I doubt that those old folks with sensitive eyes will be capable of reading books on an LCD for hours without feeling like they have been stabbed repeatedly in the eye.
As someone who works in the printing industry I happily agree.
Because it's not very enviromentally friendly?
There's no doubt in my mind that the screen on an ereader is comparable to a paper book and the convenience of storing hundreds (if not thousands), of books in such a small form factor is awesome. Most books I've ever wanted to read, I've found in a digital format. Come to think of it, there's not one I've not been able to get hold of.
If you like holding a paper book in your hand then fair enough. I couldn't give a damn and my ereader gives me a fantastic replacement with no drawback I've found yet, aside from Sony's terrible software ;)
back on topic. Cheaper smaller versions of the iPad could be cool, but unless it gets flash support, I'm not even considering any kind of iPad. Shame because I love my iPhone: flash isn't as important on it.
I think they are just as water proof as a book =p
But if you drop a book in the bath at worst you only have to cough up £10 for a new one :p
That looks shopped to me. I can tell by the pixels.
Seriously though.. WTF Apple!
Key issue is, unless Apple picks up Pixel Qi screens, IPS based LCD screens will stab your eyes when you read for long periods of time. The screen technology that MOST companies with a brain uses for eReaders is E Ink.
LOL
Because people LIKE books. You are wrong. e-readers aren't new. They've been around a while now, and I still don't know anyone who has one. You remind me of programs like Tomorrow's World which in the early 80s informed me with grave authority that in 25 years time there would be intelligent robots cleaning my house and doing my job for me.
Just because you CAN do something, doesn't mean you should, or even that anyone would WANT it anyway.
People like books.
Now stop wasting thread space and go invent me a robot that makes dinner.
I don't care if it's 9.x inch or 5-7 inch of useless-ness (for me).
Don't kid yourself. The only reason apple is releasing 'updated' versions is to milk more money out of the public. i.e artificially increase revenue and sales figures
Got her an e-reader and it does get a fair amount of use, where possible though she does prefer actual books as others have mentioned previously. It she can take a load of books on holiday, to the park, to work or to bed and not have to cart massive weight around with her. A touch screen reader with double pages and a touch screen (so the use becomes more like a real book) might help things along a little as well....
The market for e-books isn't quite there at the moment, prices are often as high (or higher) for new releases compared to hard copies. Maybe the iPad/Kindles popularity will help improve this a little? Who knows.
The one major advantage of the dedicated ebook readers is the screen. They're simply amazing to use, very easy on the eye and no worse to read than a real book. That's probably one of the biggest issues with the iPad, the screen really isn't suited to peroids of long term reading. That's why I'm not quite sure why the iPad/iPad Mini and being pushed so much for the portable reading market??
e-book readers are not doing well at the moment because they are not very intuitive (and they are riddled with reliability issues, incidentally. Several Kindle and Sony eBook users I have spoken to have returned their purchase --or in the case of Sony, tried to). I mean, if you want to turn a page you have to press one of an array of buttons put in the weirdest places. If you want to look up a chapter you have to navigate menus. There is no colour; not even good grey-scale images.
iPad is a serious improvement: a good, reactive colour screen; turning a page by an intuitive swipe; good battery life. It may not replace paper, but for those of us that don't want to haul stacks of books around with us, it is very handy. A large number of interactive books and self-updating magazines/newspapers in a compact and light device that you can also use to browse the internet, send e-mails, watch videos and play games? Seems a no-brainer, really.
Do you also believe in Creationism and that the moon landings were faked? Just wondering. Because seriously, I haven't seen such blind belief contrary to the obvious facts since I spoke to a Jehova's Witness.
Agree about Apple though: how anyone can say they're not successful is beyond me. I wish I'd have dropped a grand on their shares when I was going to (about 2000), I'd have been quids in :p
I do a lot of ebook reading on my winmobile phone (similar screen technology to the ipad, essentially a miniature ipad in regards to pure ebook functionality)
My friend has one of the newer Sony readers and simply is orders of magnitude better for ebooks (i borrowed it for a few days :) ). The E-Ink displays are so much nicer to the eye than active backlit screens, theres really no contest.
Admittedly the display lag is a little annoying, but i found you get used to that very quickly and it becomes a non issue.
As for the tablet PC as an ebook reader concept goes, devices with this new hybrid e-ink/lcd display tech should be amazing: best of both worlds
You will see the next big thing presentation: "We have made something new, its called ink, put it on a paper and you have what we called a book! It's amazingly cheap, does not require power, and you can buy it in a store or get it from libraries in every city on earth! Better yet you can get hundreds of so called 'pages' in a book. And it can have ink on both sides of the page! If you have done reading the book you can sell it on e-bay or put it into a bookshelf for decorative purposes. We are now working on color ink but it takes another 5 years to present it to the public, its still in research."
The iPad has lots to recommend it as an e-book reader, principally Apple's trademark intuitive interface, but I couldn't deal with reading a novel from that screen, vibrant and sharp though it may be. Reading from a page is a far more relaxing experience than reading from even the best backlit LCD screen, and the screens of existing e-book readers like the Kindle far more closely replicate that experience. And let's not go into battery life - a few hours may be great for a media player, but a Kindle should easily last a fortnight's holiday with some fairly heavy reading without a charge, and there is no way the iPad can match that.
Completely agree with you on ebook pricing. They're trying to do the same thing the music industry did and charge the same for a digital copy as they do for a hard copy even though the cost of replication and distribution once the material is created is virtually non-existent. I can pick up second-hand paperbacks for a couple of quid in places, I'm not going to pay hardback prices for an ebook. Greed will be the end of us all.
Anyway, ereaders are useful to some extent but the selection available limits the readership to pretty tawdry stuff (kids' books in my view). Good factual books are rarely released in this format. I would be able to see the value for students if the reader itself didn't cost so much, but as it is, over the length of a degree it still seems cheaper to buy the physical books.
As for the MP3 claim, they're poor quality of a kind that only suits music that can suffer degradation of bits - such as most current youth music. Classical and jazz sound abysmal on them. Even for rock, unless you spend all day roaming the streets, there is no competition between CDs and MP3s.
I suspect that those who think books will be replaced entirely are those who have very few books in their collection or only buy the latest J K Rowling or similar pap.
The publishing industry now works on such small margins in everything except the trash market that it has become impossible for smaller businesses to break into it. Ebooks are the one chance there is of decent returns being made to publishers and authors, without the large distribution warehouses taking it all (up to 60% of what you pay on a paperback goes to Gardeners distribution, which has an effective monopoly in the UK).
Of course, the publishers and authors of popular fiction don't have to worry about this, since they have the necessary turnover. But as for the rest of the bookworld, which is far more important, ebooks offer a good chance of publishing at more than the break-even point.
So, no, greed will not be the end of us all in this situation, but ignorance might be.
I've had two e-ink devices so far (had to buy a second after a mate sat on the first - Grrr), and it has been an absolute god-send for me. I know I am not representative member of the public when it comes to reading (I average around a book a day), so take that into account ;)
As with many posters above, I do prefer the tactile experience of a paper book. However, for ease of transport, convenience, etc, I tend to only carry the ebook these days. Currently, it is loaded with around 500 books, of which I have read* around 350 - not too bad given I have had this one about a year.
The current price of ebooks is nasty, but what makes it worse is that the electronic copies are usually (in my experience - but i've not bought too many of them) worse quality than the paperbacks, because they are OCR'd with no proof-reading. Why, I have no idea, but paying 10 quid for a book, and finding pages of random characters is nearly criminal :( (note: this applied to a couple of Terry Pratchett books I paid for - at least I got a refund from the publisher)
Fortunately, there is so much legit content that is outside copyright (ie several centuries of classics, etc) that I very rarely find myself in a position of wanting to buy a book. If there is something that I have to buy, then I buy it in paperback.
As for the comfort of reading from an e-ink device, it is pretty much the same as from paper. Current e-ink screens have near enough the same dpi as an office printer (300dpi), and they work on the same principle (ink molecules over a matte white backbround). This means that there is no backlight to strain the eyes, the device works even in the brightest of sunlight, and it only draws power when changing the page - once rendered, the screen requires no power to maintain the image.
Compared to this, the iPad is a complete non-starter. Battery life is limited to 10 hours - less than a full day reading for me, and it will (probably) be hard to read in direct sunlight - so no reading in the park during summer. As such, it will be fairly useless for reading ebooks (compared to a dedicated e-ink device) - but the other capabilities of the iPad may make up for it.
I just hope that 'joe public' doesn't get confused between e-ink readers and the iPad - because if they think that the iPad is a 'proper' ebook reader, it will be harder for ebooks to gain traction once the 'its crap for reading on' reviews start coming out...
*by 'read', I don't mean skimmed - I mean read to the point of being able to discuss plot lines, characters, details, etc several weeks later.
I always take books on holiday, its good to read when you are waiting in airports for hours, it good to read when you are on a 9 hour flight, and its nice to read late at night when the kids are in bed and you cant leave them *Cough* Mrs McCann *Cough*
I'm sorry, I should have been clearer in my post. I was referring to mass-appeal pop-fiction, rather than the more 'niche' market. However, using your own figure of 60% of the cost being distribution-related, even if they sold an ebook for half the price of the paperback, they would still make more profit than on the paper copy. What I object to is making 60% savings on distribution and having virtually free replication and still charging exactly the same. Oh, and, they should include the e-book free when you buy the real book.
Lmao with that one xD
No. People like books because they enjoy the tactile experience, the smell, feel, and even ritual involved.
I love the way you make these statements on behalf of "people" Nexxo. It makes me laugh.
May I remind you that I am a person, and I love reading books, and I will not be buying an e-reader despite being an avid early adopter of most things hi-tech. Why? Like I said: I like books.
I think you'll find the majority of people agree with me, which is why e-reader sales have always been woeful, despite being sold for quite a few years now. It's not due to the technical limitations you mention either. Since when has THAT stopped people buying "cool" gadgets?
They don't sell well because people like books. The same way they like a newspaper at breakfast, or on the tube.
Just accept it Nexxo, despite it causing you pain... there are certain things technology just has no place meddling with.. because there's no need. Books be one of 'em :)
You're wrong. End of.
[EDIT]
Oh, and just to pre-empt the inevitable responses: I'm NOT saying they don't have a place, as taking an e-reader on holiday can be useful (although I still maintain the majority would prefer a real book). My initial comments were in response to the person who stated that they would REPLACE books in 3 years, which is patently nonsense. They have their uses... but replacing books is not one of them.
But you know Nexxo... he always knows best. ;)
Well.. at least when I say "people" like books, there's some evidence to back it up: The fact that e-readers have never enjoyed good sales despite being around for ages. Saying "people" only read books because there's no alternative is sheer conjecture. E-readers have been around for over a decade now. If they were the holy grail readers have been waiting for, they'd be selling in larger numbers by now.
Nothing against e-readers either. I've toyed with buying one many times, and may well yet do so, but it will be for specific uses, and not to replace books. It's main use will be to replace older books I no longer wish to have taking up space, but am not ready to be without yet.
Incidentally: Last night, my cat was scratching my blinds. I threw a book at the wall next to her to scare her (I wasn't aiming AT the cat.. worry not). I couldn't have done THAT with a e-reader.
To me, e-readers are to books, what Microwave ovens are to conventional ovens. Despite the mid 70s hype, they have NOT replaced the former, or transformed the way we cook and eat. Nor will the e-reader. It will settle down into it's own little niche, and sell steadily to those that require it.
Errrr... yeah, right. :D
gew68Qj5kxw
And that is the problem. By the time eInk screens have caught up, the iPad has already set the benchmark of expectation, and that is way, way ahead of anything eInk can offer.
Seriously, the phenomenology of literacy is an important concept in cognitive child development. I do know what I'm talking about.
You know that experience of reading a freshly-printed Sunday newspaper, its silky feel of the pages, its smell of ink and paper mingling with that of a good cup of Monsoon Malabar coffee and warm toasted bread, with the warm morning sun shining down on your skin as you sit at the breakfast table? Many people don't. They're not even aware of such a thing. That level of sensual awareness was never taught them. They don't read for enjoyment. They would not, like I just did, buy a 1924 copy of the combined works of Rabelais because an old, weathered leather-bound book printed on acid-free paper is just so much nicer to hold than a modern copy (nor, for that matter, would they buy a hand-wound brass fusee mechanism timepiece over a much cheaper cheap and arguably more accurate battery driven quartz clock).
Many people have not grown up valuing reading, or books. They would not buy a paper book, let alone a £200,-- electronic one. They often don't feel comfortable with computers or electronic gadgets either (I know, this may stretch your imagination seeing as you're also not one of those). So if you are trying to combine a book with a gadget, you are really turning that section of the population right off.
Ironically, the people who do buy gadgets (the younger generation) are generally not that interested in reading books either, so the eReader just misses both markets: those who value reading, because they also value the sensuality of books, and those who value gadgets, because they don't read all that much.
Technology will replace the paper book. The right technology simply has not come along yet (e-Readers are not it). You have to realise that (the format of) books are a heavily cultural phenomenon. We (i.e. that part of the population that was taught the value and pleasure of reading) are comfortable with them, like e.g. the Japanese are comfortable with communal baths of a temperature that makes our skin peel off, and food that still twitches on their plates. When you change the format, you change cultural practice, and people like you and me may feel resistant to that, because we like the smell and feel of paper. We like the culture of reading: books, book shops and libraries. To others, however, books are purely a medium for holding written information, and if a better medium comes along, like the internet and tablets they'll happily adopt it.
Think of how quickly mobile phones became integrated in the culture of the younger generation, and how that changed the medium of communication for them. Older people may prefer personal face-to-face communication or the experience of letters written by hand in grammatically correct and well-shaped prose (you should read some correspondence from the 1900's, even that of ordinary working-class people. Their often lyrical prose puts us all to shame). The next generation feels comfortable with land line phone calls. But to the younger generation, e-mail, txtspk and Facebook is second nature. They are growing up in a time where information is virtual --where the format in which it is stored and presented is secondary, and where interactivity is not about the smell and feel of leather and acid-free paper, but about point-and-click and directly influencing what you see on the 'page'.
Now think of the sensuality of technology. Think of motorcycles. Think of a well-built sports car. Think of why the iPad, for instance, is doing so well. The look, the feel, the smoothness and interactivity of the GUI; everything about it makes it a joy to use, so that you forgive it its shortcomings. Just like you forgive a Lotus Elise that it is not a very practical car (wot, no radio, airconditioning or boot space?!?), or forgive a brass fusee timepiece the fact that you have to wind it every week and spend ages balancing and adjusting it to make it run accurately. Sometimes, sensuality is more important than cold functionality. This is where e-readers fail: they are reasonably functional, but they are not sensual enough to overlook their shortcomings.
In 100 years' time things will be different, however. Books will continue to exist but in a different cultural context, with different, much more formal roles, almost like gold chain watches now. eReaders will be vastly more advanced than the equivalent of carved stone tablets we have now. Think mediatronic paper like in Neil Stephenson's The Diamond Age. They will be sensual and functional and they will be so common in use, so obvious, that our descendants will wonder how we ever managed with paper books.
Guys I bought new iPad last week and I need some good looking skin on it. So could anyone here please suggest me some websites providing iPad skins?