Slashdot Mirror
Larger iPod Touch In Apple's Future?
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."
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.
> 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!
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.
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
Speculation is not news and should not be on /.. The are enough Apple-centered websites with discussions like this.
-- Cheers!
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.
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.