98 ms·
Hmm, I suppose I must have just read a selection of his comments. As others have noted, the 'no usable area in 7 inches' idea makes absolutely no sense, consid
by code_duck 16y ago
Hmm, I suppose I must have just read a selection of his comments.
As others have noted, the 'no usable area in 7 inches' idea makes absolutely no sense, considering the size of the iPhone and iPod Touch.
I think that mainly, they don't want to saddle developers with an in-between device as it would be onerous, costly and confusing for us. As much as I'd like a 7" tablet, it's smart of Apple to keep things as simple as possible for now.
- chc 16y ago> As others have noted, the 'no usable area in 7 inches' idea makes absolutely no sense, considering the size of the iPhone and iPod Touch. Jobs is talking about tablets, not phones. The iPod Touch is not merely a small iPad. If you look at an iPhone app and an equivalent iPad app, you'll see that they often have radically different interfaces. Jobs' point, as I take it, is that a seven-inch screen is too small for the kind of apps the iPad runs.
- code_duck 16y agoExactly, and I think that's what he said, that it would be a nether region in between a tablet and a phone. However, I don't agree that this size would not be desirable and useful. I want one. If I had an iPad, I'd use it for the same things I use my phone for - web browsing, skype, music, reading books, email, photos and games. Why would this size not be appropriate for those tasks? What is it that Steve Jobs thinks people do with iPhones and iPads, if not the aforementioned?