| Story Views | |
| Now: | |
| Last Hour: | |
| Last 24 Hours: | |
| Total: | |
7″ iPad Rumors Heat Up With The Wall Street Journal Now Weighing In.
The Wall Street Journal is one of the most highly regarded newspapers in the world. Most of the time, whatever they print on their paper pages can be taken as credible, accurate and reliable. So when the WSJ starts weighing on, say, the latest Apple rumors, our ears perk up.
Earlier this morning, the WSJ published a new story confirming what Bloomberg published yesterday — Apple is scheduled to release an iPad “Mini” (in the 7″-8″ range) this fall. Both organizations cite various sources in the industry as well as Chinese parts suppliers, the latter of which are allegedly placing large orders for components that could very well be part of this smaller iPad. (For the record, both Bloomberg and the WSJ as well as many other credible news sources have posted similar content before. But now as we draw closer to the rumored fall release, the posts are increasing in number and detail.)
One of the WSJ’s sources said that the mini iPad, whatever size it is, won’t feature the “Retina Display” found on the current third-gen iPad, iPhone 4/4S or new Retina MacBook Pro.
Is this the tablet you’ve been waiting for?
For many people, the iPad and iOS ecosystem is a perfect combination save for the iPad’s 9.7″ screen size. Some people just won’t buy into an end-to-end ecosystem if they’re unhappy with the actual hardware. A smaller iPad is just the ticket, and will definitely cause Apple’s stranglehold on the tablet market to grow and their market share to (once again) climb as holdouts begin cashing in. That said, are rumors of a non-retina display dampening your excitement?
As tempting as a $200-$300 iPad mini would be, a non-retina display would seriously make us question opening up our wallet. After living with an iPhone 4/4S for almost 2 years now, the iPad 3 and now a Retina Macbook Pro, looking at the digital world on anything else is simply depressing and jarring. Would you do it?
Source:
