For anyone wondering why Daring Fireball is able to garner a lot of attention (and for that matter, almost any article pertaining to Apple) I refer you to two studies:
- When, Why, and How Controversy Causes Conversation by Zoey Chen and Jonah Berger
- What Makes online Content Viral? by Jonah Berger and Katherine L. Milkman
Results from the first study reveals that controversy significantly affects likelihood of discussion. The second study comes to a similar conclusion but fleshes it out a little more eloquently:
"Importantly, however, our findings also reveal that virality is driven by more than just valence. Sadness, anger, and anxiety are all negative emotions, but while sadder content is less viral, content that evokes more anxiety or anger is actually more viral. These findings are consistent with our hypothesis about how arousal shapes social transmission. Positive and negative emotions characterized by activation or arousal (i.e., awe, anxiety, and anger) are positively linked to virality, while emotions characterized by deactivation (i.e., sadness) are negatively linked to virality. More broadly, our results suggest that while external drivers of attention (e.g., being prominently featured) shape what becomes viral, content characteristics are of similar importance (see Figure 2). For example, a one-standard deviation increase in the amount of anger an article evokes increases the odds that it will make the most e-mailed list by 34% (Table 4, Model 4). This increase is equivalent to spending an additional 2.9 hours as the lead story on the New York Times website"
Apple is well known for controversy and Gruber is known for his snark (though I found this article to be insightful speculation) - the two seem to really complement each other and a lot of their success comes down to their behaviour. So for anyone who feels inclined to write another "Why is Gruber on HN?" post, that's why.
Backing your opinions up with studies is great. There sure are plenty of reasons (other than quality, which is the elephant in the room IMHO) that Gruber might sometimes find himself on HN.
But your analysis is more about why any article of his can qualify. Wouldn't it be better to judge this individual piece on its merits instead of pleading the general case?
If you label each of his articles as "Controversial; Pro-Apple" you run a risk of forgetting to read them. Today's piece should count against that label, not reaffirm it.
I'm not sure what's gotten into Gruber lately, but not only is this entire essay basically attitude free, he's also got a lot of content, and, dare I say, math/geometry in this piece?
He gives credit to Digitimes of all orgs for the original (March!) prediction of a thin-bezel ipad - and goes out on a bunch of limbs predicting what the new iPad Mini might look like. In particular, his weight prediction, of 265 grams, is somewhat hard to believe - but would be very much appreciated by those of us who spend 2-3 hours a day reading books on our (somewhat overly large for that function) iPad.
I'm glad Gruber seems to be writing more of these long form pieces. Short and snarky is not as much of a strength for him as he thinks it is.
On the content: Right on. I will definitely be surprised if the words "thinner" and "lighter" do not feature prominently in Apple's keynote, both vs. the Retina iPad and the Google/Amazon competition.
Short and snarky is not as much of a strength for him as he thinks it is.
The snark is why I had to stop reading Gruber. He's a great blogger, but his attitude made me have to walk away every few articles and just take a breather. It's not an endearing trait.
When "The Tablet" piece came out, I was sold on Gruber's ability to really analyze Apple and think through details in an informational and insightful way. I was impressed enough that I sought out and read some of his much earlier long-form essays, mostly about the nascent days of OS X. He's always had this in him, but I agree the snark has been pushed way too far over the course of recent years to the detriment of the blog.
>If you think these stories appearing within a day of each other in the two most-respected business publications in the U.S. — at the same time the Nexus 7 reviews began appearing and the device started shipping to customers — is merely coincidental and not a strategic competitive leak from Apple PR, then I would like to invite you to play in my poker game.
>The angle to these stories is not merely “Apple is set to release a smaller iPad”, but “Apple is set to release a smaller iPad and it could squelch the Nexus 7 and any other smaller tablets before they ever really get a chance to take off”.
Gruber will apparently even try to spin a "me too" response by Apple as genius.
You seem to assume the "iPad Mini" hasn't been in development since well before the Nexus 7.
Given how short a timeframe (4 months) Google gave the development of the Nexus 7[1], and Apple's supposed "don't release until it's 'perfect'" attitude, I wouldn't be surprised if it was indeed the case that the iPad Mini entered development first. If so, does it really count as "me too"? Or just later to market?
(speculation) What if the Nexus 7 was a response to the rumoured possibility of a 7-inch iPad? A way to try and capture that segment of the market before Apple rolled into town?
I'm not a regular reader of daringfireball, but that blog post is very long on speculation and decidedly short on facts. It's random chance whether any of the resolutions, dimensions, weights, or features he settles on wind up proving to the true. This is firmly in the "Bluray support will be native in the next version of OSX!" sort of speculation.
First of all - it's mostly a speculative piece - that's the point of that article. The post is a sequel to http://daringfireball.net/2012/07/this_ipad_mini_thing. Second, if you read through the first article - you'll see that he tries to justify his speculation based on some design principles that were laid down in the HCI guidelines for the iPad. He does mention where his "cupertino birds" have given him some hints though.
I don't believe there have been any assessments of the next generation iPad anywhere on the internet that have been this justified with rationale provided, or have carefully sourced all the other writers that contributed to his thinking.
I've started to read DF posts like this with the mindset that he has some inside information. It is very short on facts, but the logic seems mostly sound. Unfortunately it comes across to me as a "I have 75% of the info, I need to create 100% of the story" kind of piece.
I wonder if Apple is going to replace the iPod Touch with this.
Think about it: the Touch didn't get a spec bump while the iPhone, iPad and even the AppleTV did, and it sells for the same price of a Kindle Fire, Nexus 7 or Nook Tablet, all popular small tablets in the category where this iPad mini would compete.
PMPs are dead mostly because the same kind of people who bought PMPs are now buying tablets and Apple can't make this new iPad too expensive or it will be too close to the iPad2 and consumers will buy that one instead, nor can it make the Touch cheaper or it will cannibalize the Nano.
I've seen it suggested that the Nexus 7 isn't the Android iPad, it's the Android iPod Touch. This makes sense to me, and it makes sense to me that Apple could be moving in a similar direction with the iPod Touch itself, especially if it can hit those weight goals. This would also seem to open up some space for the iPod nano to gain functionality.
iPod Touch updates come in the fall (Sept/Oct) with the rest of the iPod lineup. You make an interesting point, but I think the devices are different enough that the Touch will stay for now. They fill different needs. The Touch is pocketable, a better iPod, and has a retina display. The mini iPad is better for web browsing, reading.
After reading both this and the iMore article, I really feel like Q4 this year is going to be like nothing we've ever seen. There won't be a reason for the average consumer not to get an iOS device. I think we're heading into a time where Apple's dominance will pass the threshold of what Microsoft had in the 90's.
And, if you consider a revamped TV is on the way in a couple years — man, we're talking about iOS in the living room, in your lap, and in your pocket. It's astonishing to think that the iPhone is only 5 years old at this point.
Um... So a quarter notable mostly for Apples entry into a tablet form factor market already pioneered by other competitors is somehow a testament to the platform's... dominance?
(I really want to respond to the idea of yearning for another IBM/Microsoft-scale monopoly too, but I'll limit myself to simple snark for now.)
> There won't be a reason for the average consumer not to get an iOS device.
My only real complaint about the iOS devices and pretty much the main reason I don't (and very likely never will) own one is that they are made by a company that I really can't stand. Hardware wise, they are decent devices that really don't have any more or less problems than their Android counterparts I have. But I won't buy into their ecosystem. I quit getting involved in debates about which product is superior because in the end, they both have strengths and weaknesses. Neither one needs to be a "killer" of the other. The world will function just fine with each of them maintaining a comfortable market share. So... ya... there actually is reason to not get an iOS device. But I'm happy you found something that works for you. Good for you. So did I. ;)
From the standpoint of a mobile developer and a user of one of Samsung's 7" tablets, the 7" form factor is too big for phone apps to really feel right on it, and too small for the big tab apps to be naively scaled down and feel right. So any Apple tablet at that size will suffer from a lack of good software until everyone catches up.
On the plus side, with the entry of an Apple device, there will be a much greater incentive to create workable design paradigms for the form factor, and both Android and iOS devices this size will benefit.
You're assuming that an iPad mini screen would be roughly as usable as a nexus 7 screen, but if the rumours are correct they would be very different. The Nexus 7 has a 'letterbox' widescreen aspect ratio compared to the iPad's chunkier 4x3 screen. Also the iPad screen would be 40% bigger. These are not small differences.
I do not see how anybody might think it would have iPad-like edges
An edge to place your thumb on must be about an inch wide. A 7 inch diagonal screen is 4 by 6 inch or so. With a one inch edge, the edge would be 16 square inches, or about a third of the area of the device. I do not see how they could sell you that (well, maybe, if they used them for solar cells and managed to power the device from it)
This was a very good piece from gruber and I say that as someone who has consistently hated his snarkiness and apple fanboyism in the past. He makes deep analyses of the ipad mini here and dare I say, sets himself apart as a key asset in the Apple tech press. There should be someone as capable of doing in-depth analyses in other tech fields too. I was thinking specifically about android device news. The folks at androidpolice are the best I know. But not of Gruber's calibre.
Anand Lal Shimpi of http://www.anandtech.com is of that calibre and far less partisan - particularly if you're looking to buy components like motherboards or an SSD.
The thinness angle doesn't sound right to me and would be a bad decision to trade it for real features. Thinness is important, don't get me wrong, but nearly all iOS device users use cases.
The thickness of a case can often double overall size and weight in your hand. This that isn't going to change, probably ever.
The extreme popularity of the mac book air and now pc clones of that form factor would indicate otherwise. I think Gruber hit the nail on the head with: Don't think of it as an iPad mini but an iPad air.
Once the early adopters flash their iPad airs around with no case (or an extremely thin mag cover), an ipad 3 is going to look fat and heavy. A nexus 7 is going to look bulky and old. Soon it will be a basic expectation that tablets are light as feather computers with no perceivable thickness. Tablets that don't come in this form factor will be seen as clunky relics of the past.
The best way to tell if an apple product will do well, is to ask your self: "Once this product gets wide spread adoption, will this product make its predecesor seem, old, clunky and/or unrefined". From a tactile and visual stand point a iPad air will do this.
I love using my iPhone without a case. Been case-less since 2007. Feels so nice in the hand and slides into my pocket more easily without a case. Reminds me of this line from Steven Levy's Wired piece where he's talking to Jobs: "When I pulled out my iPod—I was using it as a recording device—he was horrified to see that it was covered by a plastic case, something that he considered an abomination."
http://www.wired.com/magazine/2011/11/ff_stevejobs/all/1
I won't mind the thinness as long as it doesn't result in a bad battery life. But one result I worry about is whether the "iPad Mini" will have a cellular transceiver. My iPad 3 has Verizon LTE, and I though I was worried that it would be superfluous, I find it essential. The value (to me) of the iPad Mini would drop a lot if it lacks GPS/cellular.
Apple has used 'thinner' and 'lighter' as a differentiator across all of its production lines for years. This won't change because their customers use cases.
For me, ipad with 7.85" screen makes sense. You do not lose screen real estate because it is the same resolution as iPad 1 & 2, it is easier to carry around, apps will not need new versions to support iPad mini.
This is real size comparison of iPad 7.85" with iphone 4 and standard ipad: http://www.sizeall.com/compare/Apple-iPad-7-85-inch-mockup-A...
This all makes sense to me and I can see this being a successful product. I don't know if its too early yet, but normally when Apple telegraphs a new product people will fall over themselves to hype up the specs and decry it as useless if it doesn't meet expectations. That hasn't started happening yet - I can imagine Apple hates the over expectations but I wonder if the opposite is worse. Maybe this is just a better understood fit in the market, or maybe it hasn't sparked peoples interest in the same way.
Personally I'll definitely be buying one, but mostly because I'm very money conscious and would love a slightly bigger iOS device.
As a Kindle Fire owner I have to say the form factor of tablets this size is great. I just wish there was a better fix to the resolution issues. Limiting to low PPI for app compatibility seems like a hack.
>Limiting to low PPI for app compatibility seems like a hack.
What, and give developers another resolution to develop for? No.
The iPad Mini will use the iPhone 3GS LCD pixel density. Then in a year, the iPad Mini will adopt the iPhone 4 pixel density. This means that every "retina" iPad app that currently exists will display natively on the device.
So basically: wait a year and then you'll have that crazy-good iPhone 4+ density.
I agree with the resolution issue. I don't think I'll be buying one (assuming Gruber is right) because I'd much rather have the retina display.
But he's right about the tradeoffs. The idea of a 7" tablet that weighs as much as my Kindle is pretty amazing. I don't think my Kindle is very heavy, and I keep it in a leather case; without the case it's amazingly light.
As Gruber saidhe retina display would need a bigger battery. Apple touts battery life too much to lower it. My parents (with light usage) can go a week or more without charging their iPad. I don't think an iPad Mini with 4 or 5 hour battery life would be received that well. And the battery requires thickness and weight, not to mention all the additional costs (RAM/VRAM/screen/battery/etc).
$200 or $250 is a pretty great price point. At $350, it's in a different market segment from the Fire and Nexus 7.
Gruber got a 7.85 in measurement somewhere (I think from a past article of his).
264ppi / 7.85 * 9.7 = 326 ppi
i.e., if they made a 7.85in iPad Mini, it would have the exact same DPI as a iPhone4/4S. I can COMPLETELY see this as a viable option, as they might be able to use some of the same lines as they do for the phones and they already know 326ppi is possible.
> You might need more thumb-rest room on the sides than you do on the iPhone, but not nearly as much as you do on the full-size iPad.
Why? The iPhone is meant to be held in one hand and manipulated by the other. The iPad has a different use model and hence a slightly different design. How would the use model of the iPad mini be different?
I enjoy reading Gruber quite a bit, but it's not for his snark or his analysis. It's for his perspective. He has lots of readers because he can connect the dots. He finds stories or details that may not seem relevant at first glance, but are signs of where things are headed.
He also loves to call bullshit on trashy link bait.
[+] [-] alwaysinshade|13 years ago|reply
- When, Why, and How Controversy Causes Conversation by Zoey Chen and Jonah Berger
- What Makes online Content Viral? by Jonah Berger and Katherine L. Milkman
Results from the first study reveals that controversy significantly affects likelihood of discussion. The second study comes to a similar conclusion but fleshes it out a little more eloquently:
"Importantly, however, our findings also reveal that virality is driven by more than just valence. Sadness, anger, and anxiety are all negative emotions, but while sadder content is less viral, content that evokes more anxiety or anger is actually more viral. These findings are consistent with our hypothesis about how arousal shapes social transmission. Positive and negative emotions characterized by activation or arousal (i.e., awe, anxiety, and anger) are positively linked to virality, while emotions characterized by deactivation (i.e., sadness) are negatively linked to virality. More broadly, our results suggest that while external drivers of attention (e.g., being prominently featured) shape what becomes viral, content characteristics are of similar importance (see Figure 2). For example, a one-standard deviation increase in the amount of anger an article evokes increases the odds that it will make the most e-mailed list by 34% (Table 4, Model 4). This increase is equivalent to spending an additional 2.9 hours as the lead story on the New York Times website"
Apple is well known for controversy and Gruber is known for his snark (though I found this article to be insightful speculation) - the two seem to really complement each other and a lot of their success comes down to their behaviour. So for anyone who feels inclined to write another "Why is Gruber on HN?" post, that's why.
[+] [-] jopt|13 years ago|reply
But your analysis is more about why any article of his can qualify. Wouldn't it be better to judge this individual piece on its merits instead of pleading the general case?
If you label each of his articles as "Controversial; Pro-Apple" you run a risk of forgetting to read them. Today's piece should count against that label, not reaffirm it.
[+] [-] ghshephard|13 years ago|reply
He gives credit to Digitimes of all orgs for the original (March!) prediction of a thin-bezel ipad - and goes out on a bunch of limbs predicting what the new iPad Mini might look like. In particular, his weight prediction, of 265 grams, is somewhat hard to believe - but would be very much appreciated by those of us who spend 2-3 hours a day reading books on our (somewhat overly large for that function) iPad.
I guess we'll know in another 30 days.
[+] [-] TillE|13 years ago|reply
Graphics-heavy stuff beyond the scope of the Kindle is usually larger format anyway, and even the 10" iPad feels a bit small for that.
[+] [-] twoodfin|13 years ago|reply
On the content: Right on. I will definitely be surprised if the words "thinner" and "lighter" do not feature prominently in Apple's keynote, both vs. the Retina iPad and the Google/Amazon competition.
[+] [-] tambourine_man|13 years ago|reply
My thoughts exactly. His recent talk with Siracusa must have helped.
[edit]
From the show, 1h24m23s: “You haven't done one of those in a while where you do like screen shots and stuff, you used to do that more…”
He also changed his favicon soon after Siracusa remarked that it wasn't retina ready, so he probably listens him. http://daringfireball.net/graphics/favicon.ico?v=005
[+] [-] SquareWheel|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] alanfalcon|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mcantelon|13 years ago|reply
>The angle to these stories is not merely “Apple is set to release a smaller iPad”, but “Apple is set to release a smaller iPad and it could squelch the Nexus 7 and any other smaller tablets before they ever really get a chance to take off”.
Gruber will apparently even try to spin a "me too" response by Apple as genius.
[+] [-] __chrismc|13 years ago|reply
Given how short a timeframe (4 months) Google gave the development of the Nexus 7[1], and Apple's supposed "don't release until it's 'perfect'" attitude, I wouldn't be surprised if it was indeed the case that the iPad Mini entered development first. If so, does it really count as "me too"? Or just later to market?
(speculation) What if the Nexus 7 was a response to the rumoured possibility of a 7-inch iPad? A way to try and capture that segment of the market before Apple rolled into town?
[1]:http://www.forbes.com/sites/danielnyegriffiths/2012/08/06/se...
[+] [-] beloch|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ghshephard|13 years ago|reply
I don't believe there have been any assessments of the next generation iPad anywhere on the internet that have been this justified with rationale provided, or have carefully sourced all the other writers that contributed to his thinking.
[+] [-] ryanstewart|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] JVIDEL|13 years ago|reply
Think about it: the Touch didn't get a spec bump while the iPhone, iPad and even the AppleTV did, and it sells for the same price of a Kindle Fire, Nexus 7 or Nook Tablet, all popular small tablets in the category where this iPad mini would compete.
PMPs are dead mostly because the same kind of people who bought PMPs are now buying tablets and Apple can't make this new iPad too expensive or it will be too close to the iPad2 and consumers will buy that one instead, nor can it make the Touch cheaper or it will cannibalize the Nano.
[+] [-] alanfalcon|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] brianpan|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] zachwill|13 years ago|reply
And, if you consider a revamped TV is on the way in a couple years — man, we're talking about iOS in the living room, in your lap, and in your pocket. It's astonishing to think that the iPhone is only 5 years old at this point.
[+] [-] ajross|13 years ago|reply
(I really want to respond to the idea of yearning for another IBM/Microsoft-scale monopoly too, but I'll limit myself to simple snark for now.)
[+] [-] jack-r-abbit|13 years ago|reply
My only real complaint about the iOS devices and pretty much the main reason I don't (and very likely never will) own one is that they are made by a company that I really can't stand. Hardware wise, they are decent devices that really don't have any more or less problems than their Android counterparts I have. But I won't buy into their ecosystem. I quit getting involved in debates about which product is superior because in the end, they both have strengths and weaknesses. Neither one needs to be a "killer" of the other. The world will function just fine with each of them maintaining a comfortable market share. So... ya... there actually is reason to not get an iOS device. But I'm happy you found something that works for you. Good for you. So did I. ;)
[+] [-] akent|13 years ago|reply
Wow, that's some hyperbole. Other than price I presume you mean.
[+] [-] DirtyCalvinist|13 years ago|reply
On the plus side, with the entry of an Apple device, there will be a much greater incentive to create workable design paradigms for the form factor, and both Android and iOS devices this size will benefit.
[+] [-] simonh|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Someone|13 years ago|reply
An edge to place your thumb on must be about an inch wide. A 7 inch diagonal screen is 4 by 6 inch or so. With a one inch edge, the edge would be 16 square inches, or about a third of the area of the device. I do not see how they could sell you that (well, maybe, if they used them for solar cells and managed to power the device from it)
[+] [-] css771|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] tjmc|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] hack_edu|13 years ago|reply
The thickness of a case can often double overall size and weight in your hand. This that isn't going to change, probably ever.
[+] [-] csmeder|13 years ago|reply
Once the early adopters flash their iPad airs around with no case (or an extremely thin mag cover), an ipad 3 is going to look fat and heavy. A nexus 7 is going to look bulky and old. Soon it will be a basic expectation that tablets are light as feather computers with no perceivable thickness. Tablets that don't come in this form factor will be seen as clunky relics of the past.
The best way to tell if an apple product will do well, is to ask your self: "Once this product gets wide spread adoption, will this product make its predecesor seem, old, clunky and/or unrefined". From a tactile and visual stand point a iPad air will do this.
[+] [-] scdc|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] greedo|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] nwjsmith|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] sasoon|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] greendestiny|13 years ago|reply
Personally I'll definitely be buying one, but mostly because I'm very money conscious and would love a slightly bigger iOS device.
[+] [-] jonknee|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] bluthru|13 years ago|reply
What, and give developers another resolution to develop for? No.
The iPad Mini will use the iPhone 3GS LCD pixel density. Then in a year, the iPad Mini will adopt the iPhone 4 pixel density. This means that every "retina" iPad app that currently exists will display natively on the device.
So basically: wait a year and then you'll have that crazy-good iPhone 4+ density.
[+] [-] MBCook|13 years ago|reply
But he's right about the tradeoffs. The idea of a 7" tablet that weighs as much as my Kindle is pretty amazing. I don't think my Kindle is very heavy, and I keep it in a leather case; without the case it's amazingly light.
As Gruber saidhe retina display would need a bigger battery. Apple touts battery life too much to lower it. My parents (with light usage) can go a week or more without charging their iPad. I don't think an iPad Mini with 4 or 5 hour battery life would be received that well. And the battery requires thickness and weight, not to mention all the additional costs (RAM/VRAM/screen/battery/etc).
$200 or $250 is a pretty great price point. At $350, it's in a different market segment from the Fire and Nexus 7.
[+] [-] sliverstorm|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] gte910h|13 years ago|reply
iPad 2012 is 264 ppi at 9.7 inches
Gruber got a 7.85 in measurement somewhere (I think from a past article of his).
264ppi / 7.85 * 9.7 = 326 ppi
i.e., if they made a 7.85in iPad Mini, it would have the exact same DPI as a iPhone4/4S. I can COMPLETELY see this as a viable option, as they might be able to use some of the same lines as they do for the phones and they already know 326ppi is possible.
[+] [-] nazgulnarsil|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ghostganz|13 years ago|reply
(But I have heard of several people destroying them with coffee or beer).
[+] [-] abuzzooz|13 years ago|reply
Why? The iPhone is meant to be held in one hand and manipulated by the other. The iPad has a different use model and hence a slightly different design. How would the use model of the iPad mini be different?
[+] [-] samirsoriano|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] zerohm|13 years ago|reply
He also loves to call bullshit on trashy link bait.
[+] [-] smackfu|13 years ago|reply
By linking to it. On his massive blog.
[+] [-] mcpoulet|13 years ago|reply