Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Larger iPod Touch In Apple's Future?

Posted by samzenpus on from the is-there-heat-in-taco's-future dept.

Ender_Stonebender writes "TechCrunch is reporting that three independent sources have mentioned to them a large form factor version of the iPod Touch, with either a 7- or 9-inch screen, to be released fall of 2009. The device is expected to have access to the iTunes App Store. Beyond that, everything about it appears to be pure speculation."

40 of 197 comments (clear)

  1. 7 or 9 inch iPhones by ian_from_brisbane · · Score: 2, Funny

    Does this mean we'll also see people talking on 9" iPhones?

    1. Re:7 or 9 inch iPhones by FuturePastNow · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Seriously, I look stupid enough holding a normal phone to my ear.

      I just don't see the value of a larger iPod touch. The point of the touch is that it (a) shares apps with the iPhone and (b) fits in a pocket. This would do neither.

      A slate-type tablet Mac, if it could run full desktop apps, would have some value. But not if it was crippled to run iPhone apps on a bigger screen.

      --
      Give a man fire, and you warm him for the night. Set a man on fire, and you warm him for the rest of his life.
    2. Re:7 or 9 inch iPhones by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Trouble is, where you say "crippled" Apple's people see "Permitted, by transcendent grace of Jobs".

      Now, personally, I'd be a bit surprised by Apple building a much larger device that takes iPhone apps, because introducing two completely different screen sizes to that niche would play aesthetic hell with existing apps and possibly result in an unpleasant bifurcation of that market. Apple, though, seems quite fond of the "all your apps are approved by us" concept, so I strongly doubt that anything smaller than one of their existing computers is not going to be getting open platform treatment.

    3. Re:7 or 9 inch iPhones by dimeglio · · Score: 2, Funny

      I think a faster smaller iPod Touch might put a large dent into the sub-notebook market. All Apple has to do is give it's iPod Touch a better keyboard, more speed and more battery life, hence the larger size.

      --
      Views expressed do not necessarily reflect those of the author.
    4. Re:7 or 9 inch iPhones by rolfwind · · Score: 4, Interesting

      You are assuming this will be a music player.

      I spueculate this will be an e-ink ereader. Perhaps iTunes will start selling newspapers subscriptions and books. They sell music, movies anyways, might as well tackle the next medium.

      Good for apple. I like their competence at UI. The ereaders now, like the iRex DR1000S are often panned as being more prototypes than finished products.

    5. Re:7 or 9 inch iPhones by mrchaotica · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I can't imagine Apple making an e-ink product unless it were full-color -- but if they did do that, it'd be pretty awesome!

      (I would want it to have a Wacom digitizer too, like the iRex iLiad.)

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    6. Re:7 or 9 inch iPhones by lxs · · Score: 2, Funny

      It's the return of the '80s.

      The brickphone is making a comeback.

    7. Re:7 or 9 inch iPhones by lindseyp · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I'd buy one immediately. I use my iPhone 3g for loads of things I used to use a laptop for. I'm on the verge of buying an iPod touch to use around the house and take on trips to use for entertainment (i.e. stop my daughter from stealing my phone constantly!) and internet where WiFi is available. The main advantage of the iphone over the ipod touch for this purpose is somewhat negated by the ridiculous and exhorbitant fees charged by the carriers when data roaming. The one downside of the iPod touch is that it has no internal speaker or microphone. The other downside of the iPod/iPhone family is that internet, whilst useable, is still a tiny bit pokey on that tiny screen. If it were 7-9 inches and very high resolution (as the iPod/iPhone are), we may get away without taking the laptop. I see the point that it would have to be backward compatible with iPhone apps or run a proper OSX to be useful, but a proper OSX isn't geared towards using fingers so I suspect it will be the former. Newer apps may have the option to use higher resolutions when using this tablet. /Is that a 7-9 inch iPod in your pocket, or are you just pleased to see me?

      --
      j'ai découvert une démonstration vraiment admirable (de ce théorème général) que cette si
    8. Re:7 or 9 inch iPhones by kestasjk · · Score: 3, Funny

      How about making it a cube? It'd be like a normal Mac, except in cube form, has anyone tried that?

      --
      // MD_Update(&m,buf,j);
    9. Re:7 or 9 inch iPhones by Azarael · · Score: 2, Informative

      They already do through iTunes, there just aren't a ton of them yet.

    10. Re:7 or 9 inch iPhones by RMH101 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Might make sense in light of the rumours that iWork is going to turn into a web app:
      http://9to5mac.com/iwork-going-cloud
      "We just got a truckload of Macworld information dumped on us from our best source. As we piece it together we'll trickle it out. The first big piece of information is that iWork is going into the Cloud. Not just storage, either. We are talking interface for Numbers, Pages and Keynote (which is going to see some interesting new templates and transition additions). Yes, the iWork applications are now going to be Web Applications."

  2. Larger iPod? I want more GB by alfrin · · Score: 2

    Seriously though Apple recently stopped producing the 160 gig iPod I've come to rely on. My music collection (and videos) takes up far more than the 120 they've left me with, and I fear to god everytime I pull out my ipod for fear of breaking it.

    Would it be so hard to allow you to pay a fee for Apple to fit your iPod classic with a bigger hard drive? It can't be harder than refurbishing one, no? With the increased sales of videos and movies, I imagine more people will run into the problem of "space".

  3. iBook by Tubal-Cain · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Sounds to me like it has the potential to take up the name iBook. At that size of screen, it may be marginally useful as an ebook reader.

    PDF reader, please.

    1. Re:iBook by dunkelfalke · · Score: 2, Insightful

      even a 3.8" vga screen is already useful for reading ebooks. pdf sucks as ebook format, though.

      --
      "It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
  4. Further speculation by john.picard · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Let's speculate further. It's not an iPod Touch. It's a combination between a Tablet PC (or more correctly a Tablet Mac) and a n*tbook, but without a hinge or mechanical keyboard.

  5. Stating the obvious by ThatbookwritingWheel · · Score: 5, Funny

    > The device is expected to have access to the iTunes App Store. Another source stated that the device is likely to have the Apple Logo on it.

    --
    We are all packets in the Internet of life!
  6. at first blush, no, but then... by Tumbleweed · · Score: 3, Insightful

    When I think about how Jobs operates, I think maybe yeah. Here's the reasoning:

    Jobs hears people cry out for the 'xMac', and we get the Mac mini, way too small to be what people wanted (ridiculous expansion, so small in requires more expensive laptop-class components, etc.)

    Jobs hears people cry out for the return of the 12-inch Macbook Pro form factor, and we get the MacBook Air, so slim and badly-realized that it lacks essential ports on the back (even though it's big enough to fit them).

    Jobs hears people cry out for a netbook-class machine, and we get a MID.

    So I'm thinkin' yeah, because it's exactly what people aren't asking for. That's my 2009 prediction! :)

    As another poster said, this formfactor would be great to take up the iBook name. Either that or the return of the Newton. Well, the iNewton. Or i(of)Newt. Something along those lines, I'm sure.

    1. Re:at first blush, no, but then... by Tumbleweed · · Score: 3, Funny

      I hate to say it, but... "MacPad".

      Nah, that's being reserved for their inevitable line of feminine hygiene products. "Bleed Different."

    2. Re:at first blush, no, but then... by DiLLeMaN · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Jobs hears people cry out for the 'xMac', and we get the Mac mini, way too small to be what people wanted (ridiculous expansion, so small in requires more expensive laptop-class components, etc.)

      I rather like my mini, though. Sure, it has less oomph than a "full size" machine, but it's not too expensive, it has a small desk footprint, and it runs silent. I don't care about not being able to cram in 346 PCI cards, USB works for an increasing range of products nowadays.

      Part of the charm of Apple is that they don't follow the market. The fact that every computer maker is making underpowered netbooks nowadays doesn't mean Apple will do the same, unless they can find a way to get it right. They're not gonna run off and build anything that some people are asking for, and why would they.

      I'm with you on the 12" Macbook though, the Air is no replacement for that and it'd be great if they re-introduced a small laptop. Dunno if that's possible without severely underpowering the thing, though.

      --
      /var/run/twitter.sock is a twitter socket puppet.
    3. Re:at first blush, no, but then... by DrEasy · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Maybe "MacPod"?

      --
      "In our tactical decisions, we are operating contrary to our strategic interest."
    4. Re:at first blush, no, but then... by DiLLeMaN · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I didn't say I needed room for '346 PCI cards'. If it had been, say, twice the volume of the existing mini, it would've been large enough to use regular DIMMs instead of SO-DIMMs, and large enough to use a regular 3.5" HD instead of a laptop HD. Right there, they would've saved enough money to probably make it $100 cheaper.

      True, even though my mini is a PPC one which takes "normal" DIMMs. I'd love a speedier grown-up harddisk though, and yes, they would've saved money.

      Make it just a smidge longer, and you could've put in a discrete graphics card - maybe just a low-profile one, but certainly the option for something much more powerful than the one included in the chipset. Even with these size increases, it would still be waaaay smaller than a Mac Pro or iMac.

      That's somewhat debatable -- the iMac isn't bigger than a mini with a 20" flatscreen. In fact, it's smaller. True for the Mac Pro, but that's a completely different class of machine altogether.

      Plus it would've allowed them to sell more upgrades, etc, and more importantly, provided a machine that people have been wanting for _years_. What kind of business flat-out ignored what their user base wants? If they had a cheap upgradeable Mac, they could almost certainly grow their userbase substantially, and thus sell more stuff from the iTunes store, which seems to be their real business model.

      And would the average tinkerer (the kind of guy that would want an expandable machine you just outlined) really be the iTunes-shopping crowd?

      I think the most important thing for Apple is the Great User Experience(TM), and by offering a machine that can't be screwed up by some uneducated end user plugging in some cheap-ass hardware is NOT going to help that goal one bit. I'm going to guess that the majority of buyers falls firmly into the uneducated end user category, so this "Mac mini tower" that lots of geeks have been wishing for is not going to materialize anytime soon. Sad, but true.

      Of course, there's always the OSx86 project for the DIY people, but apart from that the userbase that wants expansion isn't really substantial enough for Apple.

      --
      /var/run/twitter.sock is a twitter socket puppet.
  7. Zune bug sim? by JayTech · · Score: 3, Funny

    Sweet! Will we be able to run a Zune leap year simulation on it?

  8. I don't see it by SuperKendall · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The tablet form factor never worked out well for the PC, and the rising netbook segment is more about cost than anything. Possibly some form of netbook that also offered a touch screen, that I could possibly see...

    One stumbling block though is that even with access to the App Store, apps would have to be re-tooled to be able to take advantage of a larger screen.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:I don't see it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      No no no.
      AppStore items run in the Dashboard or as small programs.

      It's a secret 10.6 feature.
      Doubt me? It's a perfect way for apple to monetize the Dashboard.
      Multitouch will probably be simulated by holding down a keyboard button.

      --r

    2. Re:I don't see it by DiLLeMaN · · Score: 2, Informative

      Appstore items are binaries for the ARM architecture that runs the iPhone/iPod Touch. Dashboard widgets are HTML(like)/Javascript contraptions running on PPC and x86 machines.

      Apple already has a central repository for Dashboard widgets, so why would they move all that to iTunes?

      OTOH, if they limited iPhone-apps-on-Dashboard support to recent Macbooks, they'd only have one architecture (x86) to worry about, for which they already have the ARM emulation software running (iPhone dev kit), the touchpads already do multitouch, and AFAIK those machines also have an accelerometer on board.

      It's a stretch, though, and a large one at that.

      --
      /var/run/twitter.sock is a twitter socket puppet.
    3. Re:I don't see it by aaarrrgggh · · Score: 2, Interesting

      As someone who used to need a clip board for work frequently, I always pined for a tablet. That is, until I held one and tried to work with it for a day. Software and usage was clunky, and the weight was just too much to hold and take notes for several hours. There really wasn't a net benefit to using it over transcribing notes back at the office.

      The initial rise in netbooks might have been about cost, but the next big driver will be in people that need to actually lug their laptop around all the time who only use fairly basic software.

      While I am sure Apple could find some way to innovate to make a 7-9" slate computer attractive to consumers, I have a hard time understanding how it would work with an iPod class device where portability (and pocketability) is paramount. Without the options for standard connectivity-- bluetooth stack that supports computer functions, standard USB and display ports, ethernet... I can't see it work as a "laptop replacement" or even a "blackberry replacement".

  9. Apple is going to have a hell of a lot more by hairyfeet · · Score: 3, Interesting

    To worry about if OSNews and Gizmodo are right. The company has built up the "cult of Jobs" over the years to almost mythic status, and if they are right and Steve Jobs is dying and isn't long for this world the stock price is going down the crapper.

    While you,I,and the guys here at Slashdot know that one guys does not a company make, too many of the press and public have built up the "Steve=Apple" mythos and it will slaughter their stock price. They should have been diffusing this for years instead of milking it to add to the "Apple Cool" branding. The only way I can see them not getting blasted all to hell in the market if Steve is really dying is to bring back the Woz to keep the mythos lovers happy while they have him "groom" a successor to the throne. Otherwise 2009 could mean some seriously bad times for Apple ahead.

    --
    ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    1. Re:Apple is going to have a hell of a lot more by Man+On+Pink+Corner · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I love Woz to death, but if Jobs gets hit by a bus and they install Woz as chairman/CEO, I will spend my sainted mother's last dime shorting AAPL.

    2. Re:Apple is going to have a hell of a lot more by WiiVault · · Score: 3, Insightful

      These Job's health things have been rebutted many, many times. I know they have recently resurfaced but they are still BS. Apple has wanted out of Macworld for years, at least since the Boston rebellion.

  10. Mmm, pixelly resolution goodness... by nick_davison · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "The difference now is the iTunes app store, which has thousands of games and other applications that are perfect for a touch screen device with an accelerometer."

    No. The app has thousands of games and other applications that display 480x320 which looks great on a 3.5 inch screen.

    At 163ppi, they look great.

    Run those same resolutions on a screen with 2x (7 inch) or 2.5x (9 inch) resolution and you're looking at 60-80ppi of massively pixelated crap.

    A 9 inch touchscreen with iPhone/iPod touch style OS-X and the same 163ppi resolution makes for a really interesting alternative to the netbook market. Stop hobbling the bluetooth so you can use their bluetooth keyboard when you want to type a lot and it's a fascinating package.

    But the app store's catalog remains completely useless unless they come up with a way for resolution to upscale. Granted, I've not written anything for it, but I'm guessing most apps are written with a 480x320 assumption and no scaling, no multi-resolution icons, graphics, etc. bundled in to the downloads, etc. Apple would need to get the means for updating apps to support that out to developers way in advance of a larger Touch release if they wanted the app store to carry any value beyond to show off how bad apps could look... something that would harm the reputation of the device far more than help it.

    1. Re:Mmm, pixelly resolution goodness... by Serious+Callers+Only · · Score: 4, Insightful

      But the app store's catalog remains completely useless unless they come up with a way for resolution to upscale. Granted, I've not written anything for it, but I'm guessing most apps are written with a 480x320 assumption and no scaling, no multi-resolution icons, graphics, etc. bundled in to the downloads, etc. Apple would need to get the means for updating apps to support that out to developers way in advance of a larger Touch release if they wanted the app store to carry any value beyond to show off how bad apps could look... something that would harm the reputation of the device far more than help it.

      By default apps are laid out with buttons etc tied to one edge in interface builder and sometimes with flexible spaces in between, so interfaces would just expand. They'd probably need a bit of tweaking but not as much as you imply.

      Games would be the main area which might have problems if they assume a certain screen width or need to upsize their textures. If they do this right and pre-announce then give developers a few months lead time, they could easily get most content from the app store working at a higher resolution.

      Take the example of the google maps app - toolbars at top and bottom will just be wider, with bigger gaps between buttons. Perhaps they could move some stuff from that god-awful miscellany page accessed with the little page curl onto the main toolbar, but otherwise, it would function perfectly well, just drawing more map at a time. They're unlikely to have hardcoded in screen-sizes, because you can ask for the screen size, and often the view is given a rect to draw into, rather than specifically requesting a rect. Buttons on the auxiliary functions screen might be too wide, depending on how they have them set - probably not though.

      Or take the mail app - the mail rows would just be a bit wider, probably the same height and just showing more in the screen. Toolbars and nabar will just expand and have more blank space.

      That's with no extra work on the developers' part - these apps would work pretty well, with only a few minor tweaks required depending on how they're set up.

      This isn't such a big issue if the transition is handled right.

      Some have claimed resolution issues mean iPhoneOS and UIxxx won't be used for a tablet , and they'd have to use OS X and AppKit, but I think UIKit shows signs of being flexible enough to cope with many screen sizes - most of it could be used fine on a desktop OS and reads like a clean-up of the desktop APIs (it may be that later cocoa is relegated to a compatability layer, along with all those other APIs before it).

      The really important feature for a tablet would be reading - reading websites, reading email, reading newspapers (though those are really a subset of websites nowadays), and reading books. I'd buy it just for that, but it worries me that Apple would try to be the single gatekeeper for data as Amazon have done with the Kindle.

      If they keep to an iTunes music model of allowing users to copy their own books on there via iTunes, and tie in with someone like gutenberg for classics, they could have this sewn up in no time. But I'd rather they just opened it up and let developers copy data into their sandbox - then we won't be stuck with one app for a vital function (mail.app, I'm looking at you).

      The big thing that the iPhone OS is missing at the moment is a way to get arbitrary user data onto the device for sandboxed apps - if they address that (and the bluetooth issue you mentioned), it'd be a great reading device, and perhaps even one for writing on.

    2. Re:Mmm, pixelly resolution goodness... by lxt · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Actually, the SDK is quite specific that you *shouldn't* hardcode screen resolutions, and provides methods to call to get the current dimensions of the screen. Obviously more advanced programs will need a rewrite - particularly games and other graphic intensive apps - but many more mundane applications already scale between two resolutions (horizontal and vertical positioning).

    3. Re:Mmm, pixelly resolution goodness... by fermion · · Score: 2, Informative
      The same issue came up as mac screens moved from the original fixed resolution and screen size (9"512X342, 72 DPI) Macs to a more dynamic situation. There were many ways to deal with this. In particular, games that assumed a fixed resolution would run in a window contained on the larger screen.

      The challenge of the tablet mac is allowing iPhone and iPod applications to run, while the device itself run the normal Mac OS X WIMP interface. Not necessarily all programs, but not the PDA like interface used on the iPod Touch and many netbook. Virtualization will allow this, and iPod applications will run in a window.

      In terms of resolution, this should not be so hard. Mac OS ran on a 12", 1024X768, only about twice the touch resolution. So, if we assume the 7", screen, we have something that the interface has run on, so it is just a matter of using the Atom or similar processor.

      --
      "She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
  11. Speculation by tsa · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Speculation is not news and should not be on /.. The are enough Apple-centered websites with discussions like this.

    --

    -- Cheers!

  12. Why it'll be GREAT, new input technologies by wisebabo · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The reason why it'll be really cool/great is because of the new input technologies which it'll have.

    Remember, what makes Apple products unique are not their increasingly commodity hardware but the USER INTERFACE. I believe the user interface is THE major reason for the iPhone/iPod Touch's success (look at the Xmas sales figures). It is because of Apple's ability to take advantage of the touch screen and accelerometer. Not the hardware but things like the "pinch zoom" and "swipe" and landscape/portrait mode detection.

    To really see how people have taken advantage of these features, play some of the many many games available for this PLATFORM.

    Now Apple has (hopefully) the opportunity to take these ideas even further. A 7-9" iPod Touch would make a passable netbook; that is a decent device for doing most CASUAL computing tasks. (many complaints about the tiny "keyboard" on the iPhone would go away). Where it would excel in would be in the new applications (10,000+ strong in the AppStore, close to 500 MILLION downloads) that take REAL advantage of the new input technologies. A lot of these applications, particularly the creative ones (sound and paint programs for example) would benefit substantially from more screen real-estate. And think of the games!

    So that could be Apple's answer to the netbooks. Using its (I know, I know) proprietary technologies it could bring these new technologies together in a way that is cohesive, fun and easy to use. That's the advantage of totally controlling the hardware and software. Unfortunately without this control, open source projects and (to a lesser extent) Microsoft have to aim at the lowest common denominator and can only copy what Apple pioneers.

    1. Re:Why it'll be GREAT, new input technologies by timmarhy · · Score: 2, Funny

      you don't even know if there is a new product and your already proclaiming it'll be great?? apple zealots just over took linux zealots.

      --
      If you mod me down, I will become more powerful than you can imagine....
    2. Re:Why it'll be GREAT, new input technologies by kklein · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You seem to be implying that companies should change their UI frequently... Soo... I mean... MS Office 2007 is all I'm sayin'...

      Seriously, when I went back to the Mac after 10 years off the platform last year, part of what I really appreciated was that so little of the UI had changed since System 8.5 that I just sat right back down, found the things that had changed since 10, and went to work. The fact that they get a great UI from the start and then leave it alone is one of the best things Apple has going for it.

      One more example of what happens when you don't do that: MS designed the "blade" interface for the Xbox 360. It won design awards. It was quick, easy, and intuitive to use. Everything from the most basic to most advanced options were easy to find. I, for one, loved it, and I can't remember the last time I actually liked a MS product.

      Then they updated it. Now I can't find anything and I have to shuffle through a seemingly endless pile of 3D frames, half of which seem to be ads, to use my machine. It's preposterous. You know what they should have done to improve the UI? Nothing. When you nailed it, you nailed it.

      Newer is far from always better.

  13. Re:An 'on/off' switch would be nice. by S'harien · · Score: 2, Informative

    Press the power button on the top, it should go right to sleep. You don't really power it down much, but if you needed to then hold that button down for about 10 seconds, it'll ask you to confirm and then actually shut off. There is a built-in speaker, but it has a low max volume and is basically not useful for much besides hearing alarms. Watching movies or listening to music through it is painful.

  14. a living autopsy? by Reality+Master+201 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Mr Jobs had a "Whipple", an operation best described as a living autopsy.

    Hysterical and/or prone to using overly emotional turns of phrase much?

    A "whipple" is best described as a major surgical intervention intended to reduce the risk of mortality from cancer, because unlike "living autopsy," it's at least a little bit accurate. An autopsy is a examination to determine cause of death or extent of disease - a living autopsy would be an exploratory surgery.

  15. Will It Compete With TechCrunch's Own Tablet? by GaryPatterson · · Score: 2, Insightful

    http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/07/21/we-want-a-dead-simple-web-tablet-help-us-build-it/

    Yes, TechCrunch were making their own tablet. What happened to that, I wonder.

    I love these sort of stories. Unsubstantiated rumours, speculation, hype and hope all mixed up into a story that is only a shade more believable than your average fairy tale.

    The success of pundits with long-range Apple forecasts is not so much bad as utterly atrocious. I'll file this story in the "believe it only after it's announced by Apple" pile (aka garbage bin).