Archive

Posts Tagged ‘design cues’

Top 10 iPhone 5 Mockups

October 3rd, 2011 10:07 admin View Comments

New iPhone 5

As you’ve probably heard several times by now, the chances of a redesigned iPhone 5 look slim.

But until Apple doesn’t unveil the fifth generation iPhone at the Let’s Talk iPhone event tomorrow, there is no harm in drooling over the cool mockups we’ve seen so far and still hope that Apple will surprise us by unveiling a redesigned iPhone 5.

Checkout the top 10 iPhone 5 mockups in no particular order:

Gizmodo had created this iPhone 5 mockup based on the alleged iPhone 5 spy shot from the office of a French carrier.

iPhone 5 created by Gizmodo

iPhone 5 mockup, which is thinner, wider, and longer with a sloped/curved back and an elongated home button.

iPhone 5 mockup

This one was created by folks at design studio - CiccareseDesign, which is also thinner, wider, and longer. But they’ve taken some of the design cues from iPhone 4 such as squared off design, retained the size of the home button etc. They’re calling it the iPhone Air.

MacRumors commissioned the same design studio to create high quality renderings based on the purported iPhone 5 case designs.

Some Polish students have created this mockup, which seems to be inspired by iPad 2 (via VeteranGeek).

Folks at French site Nowhere Else, who have brought us some of the coolest iPhone 5 infographics have created this mockup based on the rumors and speculations that we had heard until March 2011.

This mockup is from This is my next based on the information they had received from their source. Folks at This is my next were the first to report about the possibility of a redesigned iPhone 5.

This mockup is based on the leaked front panel with a thinner, larger 4-inch screen and a smaller bezel due to the edge-to-edge screen.

Here’s what a glossy iPhone 5 will look like, which was created by Roman Sima.

Antonello Falcon has created this next iPhone 5 mockup, which is calls the “Size Zero iPhone 5″.

iPhone 5 Mockup - Size Zero iPhone 5

Let us know which one you liked the most in the comments.

Source: Top 10 iPhone 5 Mockups

iPhone 5 Design Mockups: Thinner, Longer And Wider With Edge-To-Edge Screen

July 31st, 2011 07:49 admin View Comments

iPhone 5 design mockups

The purported iPhone 5 cases suggest that Apple’s next generation iPhone will be thinner, longer and wider compared to iPhone 4.

MacRumors points us to two iPhone 5 design mockups based on the recent rumors that give us an idea what the next iPhone may look like.

The first one (which you’ve probably seen before) is thinner, wider, and longer with a sloped/curved back and a larger home button.

As mentioned earlier, it is based on the purported iPhone 5 cases, which we’re hearing are everywhere in China.

The second iPhone 5 design mockup was created by folks at CiccareseDesign, which is also thinner, wider, and longer. But they’ve taken some of the design cues from iPhone 4 such as squared off design, retained the size of the home button etc. They’re calling it the iPhone Air.

Let us know what you think about these iPhone 5 mockups. Which one would you buy?

[via MacRumors, CiccareseDesign]

Source: iPhone 5 Design Mockups: Thinner, Longer And Wider With Edge-To-Edge Screen

Why Can’t Anyone Make A Popular Tablet?

April 28th, 2011 04:46 admin View Comments

I’ve been thinking a lot about the popularity of tablets and the problems manufacturers face coming up against the iPad. The devices that we see here at CG are all pretty amazing – even the Playbook was a cool, if flawed, device – but no one device seems to be able to grab any traction. In looking back, I see echoes of the netbook craze of the oughts, and the parallels with this “fad” (along with the distinct differences) are very telling.

As you’ll recall, Apple sat out the netbook race. Sure, they put one ultralight device forward, the Macbook Air, but it was a premium device, while the other manufacturers drove prices into the dirt and sent quality lower and lower. The result, if you’ll look at the blasted laptop landscape today, is a market full of an amalgam of mid-range fleet laptops for business travelers that have taken some design cues from higher-end netbooks and goofy art-themed mini laptops for students.

The netbook – at least the small, squat, and compact devices so many claimed to love – has been abandoned for 13- to 15-inch models that are considerably thinner and lighter than they were a few years ago. Although my evidence is more or less anecdotal, I can assure you this is the trend I’ve seen in the the current crop of laptops coming up in the next few months and no matter how much you defend your netbook, you have to admit they got pretty bad near the end of the decade.


So how does the current tablet market compare to the long decline of netbooks? Well, I believe that the two markets are, in a sense, similar, but it’s the differences that are preventing any one manufacturer from gaining any traction in the tablet space.

First, we need to make a basic supposition. We assume, for sake of argument, the iPad is most popular consumer tablet thus far created (the sales numbers bear that out) and we need to assume that the popularity of the iPad is something to which all manufacturers aspire.

I also posit that manufacturers are social animals. They see what their peers are doing in the space and then head over to Asia to have it manufactured. There are only a few major manufacturers and these factories offer fairly limited configurations from which OEMs can choose. Sure, guys like Dell and HP can order up their own silicon but they didn’t get their laptops below $500 by customizing the motherboard. They bought some standard boards, slapped in some chips, and created permutations of the same thing in different trade dress. As it once was with stereos – manufacturers would hide the extra features like EQ sliders inside the case and simply charge a premium to expose them – you were basically buying the same laptop with a different name.

Essentially, laptop manufacturers saw a way to make a cheap buck with commodity hardware. They offered sub-par performance and non-optimal sizing to a world that was ready to buy into a lie that you didn’t have to pay for quality. The same consumers who lapped up netbooks in the hopes that they would make good “second computers” are now lapping up iPads – and, to a lesser degree, Android devices – and actually using them as second computers.

In terms of manufacturing, the age of tablets is different from the age of netbooks mostly because there is no way to make a cheap tablet. You only have a certain, finite amount of space inside a small tablet case and, more important, tablet PC parts are expensive and often custom-built. Touchscreens are expensive because mother-glass manufacturers see Apple buying up their stock and they hope to make a killing. Flash memory is expensive because, well, Apple bought it all. And the tablets themselves are expensive because Apple set the prices. If Motorola could have gotten the Xoom below $250 I’m sure they would have but, given that there is a more popular alternative out there that costs twice as much, playing a scorched-earth pricing game would leave money on the table.

But manufacturers can’t “beat” the iPad because they’re still playing by netbook rules. As Stephen Elop said, there will soon be “200 tablets” on the market and only one clear winner. But hardware manufacturers are like sharks – they can’t sit still. They need to produce products constantly, no matter the popularity, and as a result, on the aggregate, no one device they produce out of the other 199 can touch the reigning king. It may sound hyperbolic but it’s true. However, they’ve been surprisingly reticent to produce many tablets. I’ve heard it said over and over: “If RIM had released the Playbook a year earlier, they would have owned the space.” Instead they announced early and hemmed and hawed and then released a device that is potentially superior to the iPad but, in practice, little more than a smooshed out Blackberry smartphone.

Also, consider the reason carriers selling tablets with a contract: it’s the only way manufacturers can make a modicum of profit. Tablets are expensive to produce. Even at $499 they can’t make much out of a straight-to-consumer deal. There is no other way to explain why $450 Acer Iconia A500 is more expensive than the presumably more fully-featured Acer Aspire One netbook other than the commoditization of parts. While margins are slim on both devices, I would wager Acer is making more on the Aspire One than the tablet.

In the end, manufacturers must do what they know best in order to survive. They have to commoditize devices to reduce their price sufficiently and they have to drive down prices to remain competitive in a saturated marketplace. The current tablet market will not allow that for many of the reasons I mentioned above and also, simply, because no one wants a garbage tablet. In fact, a bad tablet is worse than no tablet at all, as evidenced by all the years Microsoft tried to flog their Tablet Edition software and hardware to an uninterested populace. On the low end the only tablet worth mentioning is the Nook Color, and anyone who tries to sell you a $99 is out to steal your money. In the end, the netbook craze resembles but can never mirror the current tablet craze. Although I’m reticent to call this a “post PC” world, I think this is a bit more than a fad, though, and it seems that Apple is so far ahead in terms of sales, popularity, and usability that everyone else is, in a word, flummoxed. They just can’t fit a tablet into a global supply chain that rewards chintz.


John Biggs is a Brooklyn-based writer. You can Tweet him here and email him at john at crunchgear dot com.

Source: Why Can’t Anyone Make A Popular Tablet?

Like ‘Twitter For iPad’? Check Out Its Facebook Counterpart, Facepad

January 2nd, 2011 01:48 admin View Comments

In what has become one of the not-so-great mysteries of technology, Facebook still hasn’t launched a native iPad application nine months after the device made its debut, despite the fact that many thousands — perhaps even millions — of people search for it every day.

Of course, that hasn’t stopped some enterprising developers from launching Facebook applications of their own — ’Friendly for Facebook’, which is made by a third-party, has become one of the App Store’s most successful applications. But that application is hardly perfect, and now it has a new challenger: Facepad, a Facebook application that has clearly taken many design cues from Twitter’s innovative iPad application, which was released in September.

The similarities are obvious, but that isn’t a bad thing. The biggest involves the way new windows are handled: just like Twitter for iPad, when you tap on a link to a piece of content Facepad will slide a new window onto the right hand side of the screen. This allows you to quickly jump to a linked article and then back to Facebook without losing your place, or between multiple friend profiles — something that isn’t so easy using a normal web browser. The application allows you to keep dozens of these tabs open at once, so you can flick across a bunch of profiles in a few seconds.

It’s pretty slick, and people seem to like it. Since launching last week, Facepad has managed to get quite a bit of organic growth. In its first twelve hours the application served over a million ad impressions — that doubled to 2 million impressions after 24 hours. Now the app is up to tens of millions of page views and is the 15th most popular application on the App Store overall.

At its core though, Facepad is still a reskinned version touch.facebook.com, the web-based version of the social network that Facebook has optimized for touchscreen displays (Friendly, another third-party app mentioned earlier, also uses touch.facebook.com as its core). This means that, aside from the handy nav bar at the left hand side and the window swiping, much of the application still feels like a regular website, which isn’t ideal.

Cofounder Cole Ratias says that will change with the launch of Facepad V2 — the team is working to make the whole application feel more like a native app, so you’ll be able to do thinks like flick through photo albums the way you would in the iPad’s default photo application. Ratias also says that the team doesn’t want to implement anything that feels half-baked — for example, he points out the chat feature in Friendly, which takes up the full screen and feels a bit clunky. Facepad will also offer chat, but not until it can present it in smaller window overlays.

Facepad is the first product from a new startup called Loytr, and the company has bigger ambitions than just becoming a better way to browse Facebook (though they’ll take that, too). In the future the company plans to integrate a gaming platform into Facepad featuring Facebook Connect-enabled, casual games that use Loytr’s APIs for monetization and other functionality (this way Loytr will be able to take a cut of revenue). The company has other plans beyond Facebook, though Ratias declined to describe them in much detail for now.

Of course, there’s little doubt that Facebook is going to be release something that’s better suited for the iPad’s large display — but based on comments from CEO Mark Zuckerberg, when it comes, it may well be based on HTML5. Zuckerberg says that Facebook doesn’t currently have enough resources to develop separate native apps for each platform, so it makes sense to make a web-based solution.

One big thing to note: the current version of Facepad has a bug that will cause it to crash on iPads that are running iOS 3.2. That’s an older version that lacks key features introduced in 4.2, like multitasking, but a significant number of users are still running it. Facepad has submitted an update that fixes the bug and is waiting on Apple to approve it.

Source: Like ‘Twitter For iPad’? Check Out Its Facebook Counterpart, Facepad

YOYOYOOYOYOYO