iPad mini Why can't a Retina mini sell for same price as a regular iPad?

Kendo said:

You claim to have knowledge of the "business world" but don't realize it was Tim Cook's expertise in chain management that made Apple utilize a number of suppliers like Sharp, LG, Samsung instead of one supplier. His streamlining process saved Apple billions in efficiency not to mention not having to bend their butt for one supplier by having many suppliers they can go to if they were to get shafted by their main supplier.

You view Tim Cook through the eyes of an Apple fan (which is who Steve Jobs catered to) but not through the eyes of a businessman.

Click to expand...

I never claimed to have knowledge of the "business world." Show me where I said that. I am just stating what I believe and what others also believe regarding Time Cook. Being a businessman does not equate to being a technology man.

I am not doubting Tim Cook's expertise in chain management. What I am doubting is his ability to be innovative with new technology and products. He can be the best chain management expert in the world, but if he can't help design new products and provide Apple's next 5-10 years of product development that will all be for naught.

Why can't a Retina mini sell for same price as a regular iPad?

1. No one makes a retina display 2948x1536 in 7.9" size

2. The extra horsepower to drive a resolution that high requires a more powerful processor (A5X or A6X) and these by their very nature require more power. We can see this in the increased battery of the ipad 3 & 4 over the ipad 2 and likewise increased weight and yet despite that increased battery, a reduced battery life.

In order to use the A6X or A5X in a 7.9" device, you would currently sacrifice the main attributes that make a mini a mini, that being it would end up being heavier and thicker to accommodate a bigger battery, but would still get less battery life than the current mini. It would also likely generate more heat as the iPad 3 & 4 get warm compared with the non retina iPad 2.

Heck the 16W iPad mini can last nearly two hours longer on battery than the iPad 4 with a 45W battery.

So realistically.. the chances Apple would sell a heavier, thicker iPad mini with less battery life than the lighter thinner model without retina for $170 more? None.


-------

We will see a retina display, but not until Apple can find a processor and GPU that can drive a screen that high in resolution that is far more power economic than the A5X and A6X

This may not be in 2013, as even if iPad mini jumps to A6 in revision 2, it probably won't get the A6X unless apple can re-engineer it to be less power hungry. The A6 on its own may not be enough to drive the retina resolution required (hence the need for the A6X in the first place). People assume that because the iPhone 5 and iPod Touch have retina the iPad mini should provide no problem.

However even at 1136x640 resolution the iPhone 5 and iPod touch are driving less pixels than the 1024x768 mini. (Some 50,000 less).

Stepping up to 3 million pixels at the moment requires too much power to engineer into a mini iPad without serverly compromising the design purpose / ethos of it.

MacRumorUser said:

1. No one makes a retina display 2948x1536 in 7.9" size

2. The extra horsepower to drive a resolution that high requires a more powerful processor (A5X or A6X) and these by their very nature require more power. We can see this in the increased battery of the ipad 3 & 4 over the ipad 2 and likewise increased weight and yet despite that increased battery, a reduced battery life.

In order to use the A6X or A5X in a 7.9" device, you would currently sacrifice the main attributes that make a mini a mini, that being it would end up being heavier and thicker to accommodate a bigger battery, but would still get less battery life than the current mini. It would also likely generate more heat as the iPad 3 & 4 get warm compared with the non retina iPad 2.

Heck the 16W iPad mini can last nearly two hours longer on battery than the iPad 4 with a 45W battery.

So realistically.. the chances Apple would sell a heavier, thicker iPad mini with less battery life than the lighter thinner model without retina for $170 more? None.


-------

We will see a retina display, but not until Apple can find a processor and GPU that can drive a screen that high in resolution that is far more power economic than the A5X and A6X

This may not be in 2013, as even if iPad mini jumps to A6 in revision 2, it probably won't get the A6X unless apple can re-engineer it to be less power hungry. The A6 on its own may not be enough to drive the retina resolution required (hence the need for the A6X in the first place). People assume that because the iPhone 5 and iPod Touch have retina the iPad mini should provide no problem.

However even at 1136x640 resolution the iPhone 5 and iPod touch are driving less pixels than the 1024x768 mini. (Some 50,000 less).

Stepping up to 3 million pixels at the moment requires too much power to engineer into a mini iPad without serverly compromising the design purpose / ethos of it.

Click to expand...

This is the answer, and it is a pretty obvious one. I don't understand anybody who thought somehow they'd get the same resolution as the iPad, in a smaller box, with the same battery life, for less money. If anything it would've cost more that the regular iPad because it would have been a miracle feat of engineering.

That day will come when the technology catches up. Maybe next year, maybe in two or three. But it won't be because they were holding it back to sell you something better next year.