iPadThin due in march

[Suspicious-Teach8788]

That some lie Apple is feeding their people now?

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...=1&srchInDesc=

I see a plethora of 16:10 monitors to choose from, you might always miss them because none of them show up on the best seller list. Now the cost you brought up is a great point, let's look at how the price point on 4:3 monitors looks-

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...=1&srchInDesc=

Yeah, whole bunch of validity to the cost being an issue in the form factor from one market to the next. That must be why the iPad costs $5500, right?

So ridiculously DUMB. Have you followed the display market at all? When widescreen monitors first came out we all praised 1920x1200 and stuff. Now there's this sudden "1080p" phenomenon coming out for laptops and so your 1920x1200 is no longer marketable as 1080p. As a result they shove lower res 16:9 1080p screens in your laptops so they can put a 1080P full HD stamp on it and get the masses to buy it.

If you've followed high end screens at all like the 27" Apple Cinema Display or Dell 2711 monitors you will see that LG already moved to 16:9. Yes the masses don't care, but most enthusiasts are quite vocal about the change being a bad thing.

Now I know you love this whole widescreen non widescreen argument, but let's try not to be biased and look back at 2005 when widescreen monitors were becoming popular. What did people say? Oh you can multitask. Side by side windows. Do you side-by-side on your Nexus 10? Right. That's what I thought. Do you read your gmail while you Facebook on your Nexii? Nope. So the whole productivity argument goes out the window. Reading pages, it's far easier to go with a 4:3 form factor. What's the aspect ratio for a standard letter size paper? 8.5x11. More square than 4:3. Newspapers? Books?

The thing is more people use their tablets for casual surfing and a bit of light reading than they do hardcore movie watching. I'm pretty sure 4:3 makes a lot more sense. Of course whatever Google and its allies ship you, you will praise as the best. If Apple was 16:9 and all the Android tablets went 4:3, you'd be arguing the other way. Honestly, the bias is so strong it's ridiculous.

 

[zsdersw]

Of course whatever Google and its allies ship you, you will praise as the best. If Apple was 16:9 and all the Android tablets went 4:3, you'd be arguing the other way. Honestly, the bias is so strong it's ridiculous.

Of course whatever Apple ships you, you will praise as the best. If Android was 4:3 and Apple tablets went 16:9, you'd be arguing the other way. Honestly, the bias is so strong it's ridiculous.

 

[BenSkywalker]

Have you followed the display market at all?

I'd wager heavily *FAR* closer then you have.

When widescreen monitors first came out we all praised 1920x1200 and stuff.

They are widely available still, I already linked them. They are everywhere, stupid easy to find even if you are Forrest Gump. There is *NO* problem whatsoever getting them. None. Large selections. Readily available. Not selling nearly as well as 16:9. That is realities fault, not mine. I know, all praise be to Jobs and to hell with that awful reality blah, blah blah, RDF>>>>all etc. It's not my fault- 16:10 very easy to buy and doesn't sell nearly as well as 16:9. We now have manufacturers starting to producing much wider screens.

Do you side-by-side on your Nexus 10?

I side by side on my phone depending on what I'm doing, why wouldn't you?

What's the aspect ratio for a standard letter size paper? 8.5x11. More square than 4:3. Newspapers? Books?

You are late to the conversation. This has been covered, 16:9 isn't wide enough to handle properly formatted legal print, just wide enough to handle business formatting. I linked up the breakdown of proper formatting already, the question is if you like to use the RDF to imagine away the bezels or not. If you need to double up on your margins, because the RDF says bezels don't exist, then you should stick to 4:3. If you live outside of the RDF, then bezels do exist which eliminates the two main factors for margins existing- one is binding, two is so that you don't cover the text you are trying to read.

The thing is more people use their tablets for casual surfing and a bit of light reading than they do hardcore movie watching.

Did Jobs come down from up high to make that declaration Himself? If He didn't, how do you know that's true? Read about it on Twitter or something? I laugh at that mainly as IME it depends on who is using the tablet what they do with it. My wife and my 14 year old daughter have usage patterns similar to yours, lots of web browsing and social networking. My boys use theirs almost exclusively for gaming and YouTube. My younger children use theirs most the time for watching their shows. I use mine for everything.

 

[Suspicious-Teach8788]

I'd wager heavily *FAR* closer then you have.

And by that you mean you should have more authority? Well unfortunately I think there are multiple people on this board that have shown your thinking to be flawed. So following closely? Cool. Following closely and failing to understand issues? Fail.

They are widely available still, I already linked them. They are everywhere, stupid easy to find even if you are Forrest Gump. There is *NO* problem whatsoever getting them. None. Large selections. Readily available. Not selling nearly as well as 16:9. That is realities fault, not mine. I know, all praise be to Jobs and to hell with that awful reality blah, blah blah, RDF>>>>all etc. It's not my fault- 16:10 very easy to buy and doesn't sell nearly as well as 16:9. We now have manufacturers starting to producing much wider screens.

So what if they're widely available? You yourself have admitted that 16:9 monitors are dominating. Rewind 3 years ago. 16:10 was EVERYWHERE. 4 or 5 years ago and 16:10 was even more dominating.

I side by side on my phone depending on what I'm doing, why wouldn't you?

How many people have side by side on their phone? Not many. Galaxy Note 2 users?

You are late to the conversation. This has been covered, 16:9 isn't wide enough to handle properly formatted legal print, just wide enough to handle business formatting. I linked up the breakdown of proper formatting already, the question is if you like to use the RDF to imagine away the bezels or not. If you need to double up on your margins, because the RDF says bezels don't exist, then you should stick to 4:3. If you live outside of the RDF, then bezels do exist which eliminates the two main factors for margins existing- one is binding, two is so that you don't cover the text you are trying to read.

I think it's as simple as testing out reading webpages on a 16:9 screen versus a 4:3 screen. It's pretty easy to discern the difference. You get more usable content out of one.

Did Jobs come down from up high to make that declaration Himself? If He didn't, how do you know that's true? Read about it on Twitter or something? I laugh at that mainly as IME it depends on who is using the tablet what they do with it. My wife and my 14 year old daughter have usage patterns similar to yours, lots of web browsing and social networking. My boys use theirs almost exclusively for gaming and YouTube. My younger children use theirs most the time for watching their shows. I use mine for everything.

I don't know definitively, but there's plenty of people who open the browser on their tablet. Maybe that's why it's a must-have feature on a tablet. Meanwhile the iPad gets away without being able to copy videos onto the device without too much complaint. General text, reading, webpage displaying, etc. are pretty much main selling points in these devices.

I think the question is whether video watching is THAT important on tablets that you sacrifice app usability...

 

[Suspicious-Teach8788]

Of course whatever Apple ships you, you will praise as the best. If Android was 4:3 and Apple tablets went 16:9, you'd be arguing the other way. Honestly, the bias is so strong it's ridiculous.

Nah. It's just that Apple has thought these things through. It makes far more sense to read webpages with an iPad screen than a Nexus 10. You know this too.

It's funny to see how everytime Google stumbles, you guys will rise in defense:

1) LG Nexus launch fail: Well Google's never done e-commerce.

2) Android lagfest: But that's because hardware is fragmented.

3) 2010 Lagfest: Well that's because you're using a 2009 Motorola Droid

4) 2011 Lagfest: Well that's because you're not using the latest dual core processor.

5) 2012 lagfest: Well that's because you're not updated to 4.1 Jellybean

6) 2013 lagfest: Well that's because you're not on a quad core A15. Your Nexus 7 is outdated.

Keep the apologies coming?

I have no problem saying Apple's iPad Mini screen sucks, the lightning connector encryption chip is stupid, and the iPad 3 users got shafted. I also think the iPhone 5 screen isn't large enough and the phone is oddly long and not as elegant as the 4S.

My point is that seeing some people rush so quickly to defend 16:9 without even recognizing weaknesses of that aspect ratio is showing inherent bias. It's no secret that I think Apple iDevices are more polished, and my comments and reviews show this. Yet I've detailed why I continue to use an Android phone as my primary phone. I use both sides, and I have my criticisms for both.

 

[zsdersw]

Nah. It's just that Apple has thought these things through. It makes far more sense to read webpages with an iPad screen than a Nexus 10. You know this too.

It's funny to see how everytime Google stumbles, you guys will rise in defense:

1) LG Nexus launch fail: Well Google's never done e-commerce.

2) Android lagfest: But that's because hardware is fragmented.

3) 2010 Lagfest: Well that's because you're using a 2009 Motorola Droid

4) 2011 Lagfest: Well that's because you're not using the latest dual core processor.

5) 2012 lagfest: Well that's because you're not updated to 4.1 Jellybean

6) 2013 lagfest: Well that's because you're not on a quad core A15. Your Nexus 7 is outdated.

Keep the apologies coming?

I have no problem saying Apple's iPad Mini screen sucks, the lightning connector encryption chip is stupid, and the iPad 3 users got shafted. I also think the iPhone 5 screen isn't large enough and the phone is oddly long and not as elegant as the 4S.

My point is that seeing some people rush so quickly to defend 16:9 without even recognizing weaknesses of that aspect ratio is showing inherent bias. It's no secret that I think Apple iDevices are more polished, and my comments and reviews show this. Yet I've detailed why I continue to use an Android phone as my primary phone. I use both sides, and I have my criticisms for both.

My point is that your statement is as idiotic as the one I made about you. By copying everything about your post except switching Apple and Android around, it should be obvious I was trying to make a statement of equal idiocy to yours.

 

[BenSkywalker]

And by that you mean you should have more authority?

You asked the question, you tell me why it matters.

Well unfortunately I think there are multiple people on this board that have shown your thinking to be flawed.

On this topic? Actually I'm pretty sure most of them have given up their futile efforts to praise another Job decission- not sure if it was when they realized that Apple agrees with me based on the majority of their products or what it was.

Rewind 3 years ago. 16:10 was EVERYWHERE.

16:9 was stomping 16:10 sales then, same if we go back to five years ago. 16:10 monitors are still EVERYWHERE. Some of them may even be the same ones you saw five years ago based on their market share. What *I* think isn't relevant in this discussion. 16:10 is *widely* available and is outsold by a huge margin by 16:9. As far as relevance to this conversation I could detest that reality, it does change that it is reality.

I think it's as simple as testing out reading webpages on a 16:9 screen versus a 4:3 screen.

I thought we were comparing books where clearly the 16:9 pounds 4:3 into dust. Web browsing, ouch, even worse- I go side by side again. Sorry, I guess if you are into the whole Amish lifestyle then 4:3 may be for you

How many people have side by side on their phone? Not many. Galaxy Note 2 users?

You were asking about a tablet, if you have a 10" tablet and you don't use side by side, well, you fail. It is plenty usable on phones, no need to have to go to the extreme of a 10" tablet(or 7" tablet).

I think the question is whether video watching is THAT important on tablets that you sacrifice app usability...

Given that widescreen is simply better for both and I don't get why you are trying to decide? I think it should be telling that the *only* people who defend the 4:3 form factor are the most fringe iOS supporters. Even Apple has *most* of their devices using 16:9 now- the format won for a reason- it will in the tablet space eventually too.

 

[WelshBloke]

Nah. It's just that Apple has thought these things through. It makes far more sense to read webpages with an iPad screen than a Nexus 10. You know this too.

It's funny to see how everytime Google stumbles, you guys will rise in defense:

1) LG Nexus launch fail: Well Google's never done e-commerce.

2) Android lagfest: But that's because hardware is fragmented.

3) 2010 Lagfest: Well that's because you're using a 2009 Motorola Droid

4) 2011 Lagfest: Well that's because you're not using the latest dual core processor.

5) 2012 lagfest: Well that's because you're not updated to 4.1 Jellybean

6) 2013 lagfest: Well that's because you're not on a quad core A15. Your Nexus 7 is outdated.

Keep the apologies coming?

I have no problem saying Apple's iPad Mini screen sucks, the lightning connector encryption chip is stupid, and the iPad 3 users got shafted. I also think the iPhone 5 screen isn't large enough and the phone is oddly long and not as elegant as the 4S.

My point is that seeing some people rush so quickly to defend 16:9 without even recognizing weaknesses of that aspect ratio is showing inherent bias. It's no secret that I think Apple iDevices are more polished, and my comments and reviews show this. Yet I've detailed why I continue to use an Android phone as my primary phone. I use both sides, and I have my criticisms for both.

The fact that you're using the term "lagfest" with respect to modern android phones says quite a lot about your bias.