Slashdot Mirror


Did Steve Jobs Pick the Wrong Tablet Size?

An anonymous reader writes "During the 2010 Christmas shopping season, Steve Jobs famously dissed the 7-inch tablets being rolled out by competitors, including Samsung's Galaxy, as being 'tweeners: too big to compete with a smartphone and too small to compete with the [9.7-inch diagonal] iPad,' adding that 'the current crop of 7-inch tablets are going to be DOA — dead on arrival.' A year later Jobs was dead, and the iPad Mini, with a 7.9-inch diagonal screen, was rolled out under his successor Tim Cook in October, 2012. Looking at industry-wide tablet sales numbers for January 2013, which show that the iPad Mini surprisingly outsold its larger sibling by a substantial margin (as did 7-inch Android tablets from competitors), Motley Fool's Evan Niu thinks that the 7.9-inch form factor was the correct size all along, contrary to Jobs' pronouncements (which, of course, was partly marketing bluster — but he chose the larger size in the first place). Of course the Mini is cheaper, but not by much — $329 vs. $399 for the larger iPad, for the baseline model with WiFi only and 16GB storage. Had Apple introduced the iPad with the smaller size to begin with, Niu argues, competitors would have faced a much more difficult task grabbing market share. While the Mini is currently available only with 'Super VGA' resolution (1024x768), rumors are afloat that Minis with the Retina display (2048x1536) are close to production."

38 of 433 comments (clear)

  1. 16KB storage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    16KB storage: Apple is really screwing with the customer now.

    1. Re:16KB storage by skirmish666 · · Score: 4, Funny

      I'm waiting for the 128K model.

      --
      Sigger than your average
    2. Re:16KB storage by OolimPhon · · Score: 3, Funny

      640K ought to be enough for everybody!

    3. Re:16KB storage by History's+Coming+To · · Score: 4, Interesting

      It's the oblivious mistake, there's one in every summary, just /. editors doing some subtle trolling to get the comments going.

      --
      Please consider this account deleted, I just can't be bothered with the spam anymore.
    4. Re:16KB storage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      640K ought to be enough for everybody!

      Yes, I do agree...hearing this fucking joke 640,000 times ought to be enough for everybody...

    5. Re:16KB storage by Dcnjoe60 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      16KB storage: Apple is really screwing with the customer now.

      The worst part is that instead of using sockets like in the Apple II, for the iPad they soldered down the memory DIPs and omitted any kind of expansion bus slots, so you can't upgrade.

      Since sockets are thicker than the DIPs themselves and one of the goals was for thin, it doesn't seem unreasonable that the memory isn't upgradable. As for bus slots, well there is that Apple port that has all sorts of potential, if Apple would allow it to be used. The pinouts are there, it is the OS that restricts what can and cannot be plugged into it.

  2. Does it matter? by deergomoo · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Now there's two iPad sizes. And lots of sizes for Android tablets. A fair amount of choice for Win 8 too. Everyone's happy!

    1. Re:Does it matter? by Rosyna · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'm not quite sure why it matters since 7.9 inches does not equal 7 inches.

    2. Re:Does it matter? by rtfa-troll · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Now there's two iPad sizes. And lots of sizes for Android tablets. A fair amount of choice for Win 8 too. Everyone's happy!

      I think it does matter. Jobs was even right about the big size being needed, though his explanation given was wrong (and who knows if he even told the full truth). If tablets had initially come at 7" then they would have been far too close to phones. There would have been almost no application that you could do on a tablet that couldn't be done reasonably on a phone just a bit worse. There wouldn't have been a reason to keep the two separate and development of tablet interface programs would be much slower. In the end people would have just called the iPad a "too big phone which you can't call from" and it would not have sold as it did. I think Android is only just managing to break through this barrier and Apple wouldn't have had nearly the success they have had first mover advantage.

      The iPad is its self almost exactly the maximum reasonable size for a tablet for most people. Even a tiny bit heavier than the heaviest iPad and many people can't hold it in one hand it for long. It's already big enough that it has to have a special split keyboard for some people to be able to type on comfortably. Also the iPad is close to the limit which fits comfortably into your personal space in economy class (no; a laptop is not "comfortable") and feels spacious elsewhere. On the other hand; the size is a limitation for some applications such as a full screen magazine spread. The battery is a limitation as a replacement for a book. For photo editing, a thing which a tablet could be good for the screen is still very much on the small side. You can see why really big people with big hands and their own private jets might like a bigger tablet and you can also see why Microsoft made the mistake of making the surface too big and heavy. If you were designing the iPad from scratch and you could make it fold and add anti-gravity and had no cost limts then you would probably end up with an even larger device with more inertia and much higher resolution (I wouldn't call it more "weight").

      An iPad mini makes sense now; however that's only because the iPad went before it and defined the category of a tablet. If that hadn't happened people would just be complaining that it's a too heavy phone. Me; I have multiple android devices and I find myself switching sizes; however I definitely prefer a tablet to a phone for plenty of stuff. I'm even wondering if it wouldn't be better to just have a dumbphone and a tablet instead.

      --
      =~ s,(.*),<sarcasm>$1</sarcasm>,g if any_point_you_wish();
    3. Re:Does it matter? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      I here they make a really good spill chucker.

    4. Re:Does it matter? by BasilBrush · · Score: 5, Funny

      You sound just like my GF.

    5. Re:Does it matter? by jellomizer · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The real question why are we so fascinated with Jobs even after he died. He made mistakes just like everyone else. That said, I expect the original iPad that took years of development needed to be the slightly larger size as to support the equipment of the time to meet the price. After it was released, and the year of R&D the other companies took the iPad as a model and was able to incorporate the newer technology thus being able to make a smaller model.

      Apple will need to defend their original plans, as well not sacrifice their iPod Touch/iPhone designs.

      Was job wrong... No he sold a boat load of these things. However as time went on peoples desires had change. I think the iPad if it started small may not have been so hot, as people were looking for bigger screens at the time.

      Back in the 80's PC were popular in a configuration where the monitor sat on top of the CPU. Then it went to towers, in the 90's was the old design wrong? No, it was that people needed to use the floppy disks much more and needed access to the CPU all the time. Then with bigger hard drives it went to something you could interact less with. So a tower you can put under your desk was preferable.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    6. Re:Does it matter? by BasilBrush · · Score: 3, Insightful

      No it didn't. Pretty much the entire rest of the industry had similar alternatives. There was even an "iPad knockoff" released 6 months prior to the iPad. It was just released by a company that's not a media darling.

      So it wasn't a desirable tablet. You make my case for me.

      Apple hit on a good combination while being noticed.

      Yes, Apple did it right, and was in a position to create a market. Just as I said.

      fanboy nonsense... iCult... Fascism.

      Talking of fanboy nonsense. You really are a ridiculous person.

    7. Re:Does it matter? by drinkypoo · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Apple hit on a good combination while being noticed.

      What Apple did was make a device that worked (relatively) smoothly. While everyone else was dicking around with picking a particular feature set, Apple produced a music player, phone, and tablet that people wanted to use. Case closed. It's not because it did more, or because it was built better, it's because it was (relatively) nice to use. Someone else could have done this sooner, by picking goals which could reasonably be reached with the technology of the day. Instead they always had to push the technology and use every little bit of it from the beginning with the result that they often tried to do too much and wound up sucking.

      Today, practically any device is pleasant to use, because we have finally reached the point where you can throw more silicon at the problem in a portable device. People are all excited about how smooth their dual core phone is, well no shit, whole corporations ran on less processing power until not very long ago. But lots of us will annoyingly and repeatedly point out things like the speed of user experience on 8MHz 68k machines back in the day, including graphics and multitasking, scalable fonts, et cetera. This will not turn into a detailed rant about why programmers today need to man up and go back to assembly, it's just an observation. The point is that we all can have craploads of computing power in our pockets now if we choose to have it, so now the major differentiator is going to switch from whether they manage to make a working product at all from how pleasant it is to use and how pleasant they are to deal with. What Apple accomplished was bringing that sense of pleasantness to mobile devices. We had plenty of wow factor before, but very little polish.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    8. Re:Does it matter? by leathered · · Score: 3, Funny

      ..where the monitor sat on top of the CPU..

      How could you be so dumb, everyone knows the monitor used to sit on the hard drive.

      --
      For all intensive porpoises your a bunch of rediculous loosers
    9. Re:Does it matter? by Solandri · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The iPad is its self almost exactly the maximum reasonable size for a tablet for most people. Even a tiny bit heavier than the heaviest iPad and many people can't hold it in one hand it for long.

      Size and weight are not directly related. As technology improves you can maintain the same size at reduced weight. It may have been the right weight when it was released, but I maintain that a 9.7" screen is too small for a "full sized" tablet.

      Another aspect which I don't think is being fully considered is inertia (not the watered-down high school version, the full 3x3 tensor). Hold a fork as you naturally would. Notice where it rests in your fingers. It will balance perfectly there. That's not an accident - it was deliberately designed that way. If your center of mass is at the point where the object is supported, the inertia tensor is symmetric. That means when you translate the object, it will not rotate. It feels "balanced". When you raise your fork with food attached, your finger naturally shifts forward to the new CM, keeping it balanced and the inertia tenser symmetric. (This is also why spoons and forks tend to flare out towards the end of the handle - the larger mass there increases the inertia, both making it slower to rotate and decreasing the distance you need to shift to rebalance it with food attached.)

      To see how important this is, grab something like a curtain rod and hold it from the end. Now try pointing at a moving object with it. It'll be difficult because every time you move it (translate it), its inertia will cause a rotation making it point at something else. And every time you try to rotate it, it will want to translate. Your arm/hand effectively has to simultaneously make two corrections (translation and orientation) instead of just one (translation or orientation).

      The same is true for tablets which are balanced at or near the center. That's not where you hand typically holds it, so any lateral movement also causes a rotation. Frequently adding weight to an unbalanced object to move its CM closer to the support point makes it easier to handhold even though it's heavier. Most of the fatigue from handholding an item isn't in supporting the weight (which your arm can easily do unless you're a total wimp). It's from your wrist having to constantly adjust it so it's oriented properly. When properly balanced, there is less need for orientation adjustments, and so your hand experiences less fatigue.

      It's already big enough that it has to have a special split keyboard for some people to be able to type on comfortably. Also the iPad is close to the limit which fits comfortably into your personal space in economy class (no; a laptop is not "comfortable") and feels spacious elsewhere.

      I find it (and 10.1" Android tablets) cramped. If you remove the margins, the informational area of a magazine page or letter/A4-sized sheet of paper is about 12" diagonal. Either Jobs was brilliant and 75+ years of magazine and paper publishers were wrong, or Jobs was wrong and those industries are correct. I tend to think the latter is more likely.

      I agree the physical size of the iPad is very close to the mark (though I prefer 16:10 or 3:2). Roughly the same size as a magazine or sheet of paper. But the screen is too small and the bezel too big. That was a concession to the technology available currently and when it was first released, so I expect as technology improves we'll gradually transition to a 12" screen for full-size tablets.

    10. Re:Does it matter? by vakuona · · Score: 3, Informative

      My first mp3 player was as iAudio M5. The iPod was a far superior product. Heck it was superior to the X5.

      Many makers of mp3 players didn't get that to have 20/30/40GB of music you needed to browse it fast, yet accurately. None touched the scroll wheel in ease of use.

      None also touched the infrastructure that Apple built around the iPod. iTunes was a big deal, and other companies just didn't care to build something like that to go with the music.

    11. Re:Does it matter? by gmhowell · · Score: 4, Funny

      If you hear her complaining, the ball gag isn't installed properly.

      --
      Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
  3. Not just a giant iPhone by Bongo · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Glossy fine print magazines are horrible on anything less than a 9.7" retina display. The 10" is for the sofa. The smaller tablets are for everywhere else, so they have more usage scenarios. But I wouldn't give up the 10" form, as it is well suited to the sofa.

    Perhaps it was also a better size to kickstart the market. Obviously not a phone, nor a netbook, nor a laptop.

    1. Re:Not just a giant iPhone by History's+Coming+To · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I find ten inches perfect for one handed use in bed, but going back to tablets you may have a point - VHS won over Betamax (in part) because Sony licensed the technology for porn and Betamax refused to - a parallel with Flash today perhaps?

      --
      Please consider this account deleted, I just can't be bothered with the spam anymore.
    2. Re:Not just a giant iPhone by AmiMoJo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      That's a problem with the magazines. Reading magazine style content formatted for a 7" screen, like Google Player magazines or Flipboard or Currents or Pulse or any of the many others out there, is fine. The problem only surfaces when magazines try to throw out a PDF of the print version, in which case even a 10" display is inadequate unless you like zooming a lot.

      7" is easier to hold, easier to read full width sentences on and easier to take with you without having to switch to another device. They are not bad to type on either, for a touch screen.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    3. Re:Not just a giant iPhone by cyber-vandal · · Score: 4, Funny

      You really should have thought carefully before writing the beginning of the sentence. Or maybe you did given the rest of the sentence.

  4. Hyperbole by Dog-Cow · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Naturally most of Jobs' public comments were marketing hyperbole. His job and his passion were designing and promoting Apple products. Only a fool would expect him to endorse something he didn't believe was right. This story, though, is a classic what-if. Before the iPad, the current tablet market did not exist. There is no way to know if the current market would exist if the first iPad screen was smaller than 9.7" diagonal. Thus, it is impossible to answer the question posed. We cannot know if Jobs was wrong.

  5. wouldn't have made a difference by 2ms · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The majority of people who have bought Android tablets did so because they do not like Apple rather than because they wanted something with a smaller screen. Additionally, it is easy to forget now, but when the iPad first came out it was widely criticized as being too similar to an iPod Touch. It was only after quite a bit of time that it seemed to start to be taken more seriously despite having a screen with less than half the area of a "real computer".

    1. Re:wouldn't have made a difference by phorm · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The majority of people who have bought Android tablets did so because they do not like Apple

      Maybe the majority of people on slashdot, but I doubt it's even true with that narrow of a field. There are a few factors:
      a) Price
      b) Convenience
      c) Design/interface
      d) Features

      I service PC's on the side, so I have plenty of time to talk to "regular folk" who are not technically inclined. I also have buddies in retail. Apple sold on brand-recognition for awhile, but Samsung and Asus have become more well-known now too.

      So why do they buy android tablets? Well, basically the price is good and it does what they want. A lot of people just want something that convenient to travel with and that does email, browses the web, and perhaps plays a few games. In the older crowd, the latter tends not to apply.

      These folk used to buy laptops, but when tablets became more common the laptops were overpowered and bulky.

      A full-sized iPad was more convenient in that it doesn't take up much room in a suitcase or whatever, but at the price-point it still had competition from netbooks etc. While more convenient to pack, it still wasn't very fun to travel with as it didn't fit nicely into many purses or pockets.

      The Asus tablets became fairly popular because they had a detachable keyboard (and a lot of people aren't so fond of touchscreens for email), and were a bit cheaper than the iPad.

      Then comes Nexus 7 etc. It fits into a back-pocket on most jeans, or an inner-pocket in a jacket. It slips into a purse easily. It's cheap. It's powerful. It does email, browses the web, video-chat, etc. It'll even do flash but you're hitting a more technical crowd to get that installed

      What it lacks: HDMI connection to plug into TV's, and no "airplay." Miracast will likely replace those in the future with whatever the successor is to the Nexus 7 (I believe that it has the GPU to handle it, but not the wifi, so it won't be available on this model).

      The average person doesn't really connect the tablet to the TV, so even the above are extras.

      The other thing it lacks: A nice way to take/transfer pictures. Other tablets with SD slots would be nice for this, but space is limited. iPad is still a bit bulky for this. Phones aren't bad, but the killer feature would be something to connect the two (wirelessly) to manage photo albums on the camera device from a tablet. It seems that for the moment people are still content to manage pictures on a PC though and do the sync thing.

      So what is an Android tablet lacking that a regular person needs? Not a Linux/Android/Apple fanboi, just a person who wants a portable device?

      a) Price: Check, they're fairly affordable
      b) Convenience: 7" is a very convience size for purses and pockets
      c) Design/interface: One of the best things iDevices did is bring capacitive multitouch to portables. The cheaper Androids often had shitty resistive touch, but that's changed for the most-part.
      d) Features: (remember, regular joe). Email: check, Internet browsing: check, and - dare I say it - porn: check

      Normal people don't love Apple or Android. They might love a particular device. Sometimes they get attached to a brand for awhile, but eventually it comes down to: will this do what I want for the price it's available at.

      Customers ask me which is better. It really comes down to what they want to do with it. For many, a Nexus is fine. Some people want to use their apps on the tablet, or have a media device. In that case, the convenience of iTunes and the availability of peripherals goes in the favor of Apple devices.

      While people may play music on their phones, tablets are often more video-centric, and Netflix combined with the growing Play video collection is turning into a big competitor. If Google (or Samsung, etc) got their sh** together and made a decent platform for music, Apple would really be in trouble, but while they're improving the experience is still rather inconsistent.

  6. Public vs. inside information by MatrixCubed · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It strikes me as odd that "only" a year after Jobs' death, the smaller tablet was released. It seems to me that it would take significantly more time for an executive board to come to an agreement on a new product, then design it, build it, put it through testing, establish a supply chain, etc etc. Jobs knew it was on the design table well in advance of his demise. What the public sees is far different from what takes place inside a company like Apple.

    1. Re:Public vs. inside information by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      Except apple has grown under Tim Cook and they're making record profits.

      Other than that you're completely right

  7. It's temporary by phayes · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Narrowly looking at sales figures just after the mini was available & attempting to draw long term conclusions is extremely premature. The 7 inch iPad is selling better at present because of the people who wanted a smaller iPad but couldn't buy one.

    Some people who had a 10 in iPad are now migrating to the 7s but the great majority are happier with the larger screen. Once the pent up demand is satisfied I expect the larger iPads will again be the better sellers.

    --
    Democracy is a sheep and two wolves deciding what to have for lunch. Freedom is a well armed sheep contesting the issue
  8. Yes and no. by obarthelemy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    What he did wrong is: pick one size and anoint it The One True Size. Different people want different sizes for different uses. (Right now, I hear a lot of requests for larger tablets).

    Jobs' ability to choose and decide was a blessing and a curse: it keeps the company hacks in line and Jobs was usually right... but he was also sometimes wrong, and, above all, sometimes "picked a winner" when there was room for more than 1 device.

    --
    The Cloud - because you don't care if your apps and data are up in the air.
  9. He was right by Bogtha · · Score: 4, Insightful

    During the 2010 Christmas shopping season, Steve Jobs famously dissed the 7-inch tablets being rolled out by competitors, including Samsung's Galaxy, as being 'tweeners: too big to compete with a smartphone and too small to compete with the [9.7-inch diagonal] iPad,' adding that 'the current crop of 7-inch tablets are going to be DOA â" dead on arrival.'

    He was right - emphasis on "current crop". Despite announcing that they had shipped 2M Galaxy Tabs to stores in Jan 2011, they only managed to sell 1.4M by Q2 2012.

    It was easier to make a decent small tablet later than it was earlier due to technology improvements. If the first iPad was 7.9" but otherwise used the same battery technology, you'd have seen a lot of people complaining about the battery life - the third generation iPad had a 70% greater capacity than its predecessor, and those improvements to the technology will have made a significant different to the utility of a smaller iPad.

    Of course the Mini is cheaper, but not by much â" $329 vs. $399 for the larger iPad, for the baseline model with WiFi only and 16KB storage.

    That's 16GB storage, not 16KB.

    --
    Bogtha Bogtha Bogtha
  10. Hold the press!!! by itsdapead · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Brand new $329 product sells faster than $499 product with minor spec bump! Film at 11! (Comparison with iPad 2 is silly - it is an old product which, has lower specs than the Mini, has the same number of pixels as the Mini, still costs $70 more and will probably be discontinued soon).

    Meanwhile, the first generation of 7", 16:9 tablets of which his Steveness was speaking didn't exactly sell like hotcakes. The format has since been popularised by Amazon and Google offering extra cheap 7" tablets firmly aimed at media consumption (which they may be treating as loss-leaders).

    Its also worth bearing in mind that the Mini isn't a 7" 16:9 tablet, its a 7.9" 4:3 tablet with the same number of pixels as the original iPad. That's a non-trivial difference especially when (e.g.) you want to type in landscape format.

    --
    In a survey of 100 programmers, 111111 thought that duck-typing was a good idea.
  11. Re:Maybe he picked the wrong drug altogether by Stormthirst · · Score: 4, Insightful

    And that's why a lot of people choose to go straight to palliative care. They might extend their life by 6 months to a year, but the side affects of the treatments are so horrible and you're going to die anyway they'd rather choose the easy path.

  12. Size might not matter... by BrokenHalo · · Score: 3, Insightful

    ...but what you want to do with it does.

    I'm not normally one to leap to Jobs' defence, but IMO he was right about the preferable size. However, I'm prepared to accept that since my acuity of vision is quite a lot less than 20/20 (I hope this is the only characteristic I share with that man - though I wouldn't object to having as much money), this might affect my perception. My Android phone is adequate for its purposes (actually, I'm very happy with it), but I struggle to use it if I don't have my glasses handy. But if I want a device that's small enough to carry in my pocket, I want it to be small enough to carry in my pocket *comfortably*, and a 7"-plus device doesn't qualify.

    1. Re:Size might not matter... by PCM2 · · Score: 4, Informative

      It's true, though. The Nexus 7 fits into the back pocket of a pair of Levi's 501s, though it's a little too long to be comfortable. It will also fit into the inside pocket of a lot of jackets, but it's a bit heavy to carry there.

      --
      Breakfast served all day!
    2. Re:Size might not matter... by Macgrrl · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The problem I have with audiobooks, and especially with the concept of listening to them while driving is the amount of mental bandwidth required to actually listen to them and follow the story/argument/whatever.

      Radio is generally disposable noise you can ignore and what follows is still comprehensible. Listening to a book requires comparable attention to reading it. Not good if you are in traffic. And if you aren't really paying attention to it - why bother? Listen to music instead.

      --
      Sara
      Designer, Gamer, Macgrrl in an XP World
  13. Different Sizes, Different Purposes by tsj5j · · Score: 4, Insightful

    When the 9.7" came out, people were mocking it as simply a "bigger iPod touch" with no market. This problem would only be amplified with a smaller, 7" form factor.
    The 9.7" made it clear that it was in a market of it's own - it's not simply a slightly bigger phone, nor a netbook without the keyboard.
    Considering the iPad's success, I think that it's pretty clear they got it right (with profits) either way.

    Now, with Steve bashing the 7" screen factor - but OF COURSE! He's a salesman - naturally he'll work hard to tell you why his product is better, and why you shouldn't buy other alternatives.
    Then again, there's some truth to his opinion: having had an iPad for 3 years and moving on to a 7", I felt like the tablet wasn't offering me enough screen estate to justify bringing it out all the time - my 5" smartphone could do everything just as well. Nevertheless, I acknowledge that for some people, a 7" tablet is sufficient for their purposes.

    With the rise of 5.5" and larger smartphones though, I personally think 7" tablets are becoming a smaller market. If I want something bigger than my smartphone, I'd be looking for a 9" and bigger device, not a 7" one. The only thing 7" has going for me is the price.

  14. I don't think he did.... and atm prefer the mini by smash · · Score: 3, Insightful

    .... for ONE reason: weight.

    I think the 10" form factor is better - the keyboard is SO much easier to use. But it is just too heavy. If they can get the weight of the 10" model down a bit to something like 3/4 of what it currently is, I think they're on a winner.

    I currently have both an iPad 4 and iPad mini for evaluation purposes and the mini is just so much lighter. But the form factor on the 4 is better for trying to actually do anything other than browse (typing anything, etc).

    --
    I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
  15. Jobs did marketing and spin, and very well at that by Isao · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Steve Jobs is FAMOUS for deriding products/features not currently delivered by his company, followed by releasing exactly those features some time later when the market is ready for HIM. (iPod with video, for example.) His strength of personality (and strong products) let him get away with it repeatedly, and few observers ever held him to task for it. The problem with the iPad Mini is that he wasn't around to push it through with his charisma. Clearly it was in the works before he died, and I doubt anything "in the works" would not be known to Jobs.