iPad mini Consumer Reports on iPad Mini

Viewing angle maybe but not colors

You have a link for the whole article? I would not mind reading it.

It is a great device but overpriced.

AlanFord said:

It is a great device but overpriced.

Click to expand...

Overpriced compared to what?

They didn't bring up anything new that every other review covered. Whether its a positive or negative review seems to depend on whether you mind the screen or not.

They should stick to vacuum cleaner reviews.

Its like when you go watch a film, enjoy it, then read a crap review, your like WTF?

Reviews are so subjective, you really have to see the film or product for yourself.

corvus32 said:

Overpriced compared to what?

Click to expand...

350 euros, compared to other similar tablets on market for me its overpriced.

corvus32 said:

Overpriced compared to what?

Click to expand...

Other 7" tablets, nook, kindle, nexus etc.

AlanFord said:

350 euros, compared to other similar tablets on market for me its overpriced.

Click to expand...

maflynn said:

Other 7" tablets, nook, kindle, nexus etc.

Click to expand...

Those other tablets are costing the companies money. The mini is making a profit. As a shareholder, I approve.

Regarding the iPad Mini 1st gen, the following 3 questions should be asked:

1) Was Apple capable of doing better? - yes
2) Should Apple have done better? -yes
3) Was it necessary for Apple to do better? - nope

#3 is why Apple didn't go "all-out" on the iPad Mini - they didn't have to. look how frustrating it has been to get an iPad Mini in a store, whether it's the Apple Store or Best Buy. why introduce new costs with higher resolution displays etc, when the focus point marketing studies already predicted how successful it would be (and predicted correctly). to top it off, Apple is selling every iPad Mini it gets in stock at the store. it wouldn't have made sense to introduce a Mini with higher costs.

#2 is just a personal opinion of mine, as they could have at least put a better resolution display in the Mini (maybe not Retina, but something in between)

#1 Apple has so much $$$ it could develop its own battery to meet the demands of Retina better

thadoggfather said:

Viewing angle maybe but not colors

Click to expand...

This. I love my mini, haven't a problem with the screen, but colours are significantly better on the 3/4.

kappaknight said:

Those other tablets are costing the companies money. The mini is making a profit. As a shareholder, I approve.

Click to expand...

The question was "Overpriced compared to what?" to which I answered with the other tablets. Its immaterial whether amazon is selling it at cost or not. The bottom line is that to the consumer, the iPad represents a much higher cost and I really do not care how that benefits apple's shareholders.

With that said, I own an iPad mini, but lets be clear its probably the most expensive 7" tablet out on the market.

Medic311 said:

...#1 Apple has so much $$$ it could develop its own battery to meet the demands of Retina better

Click to expand...

This is flawed logic as you could also say that since Apple has so much money they could find a way of sticking a 512MB graphics card in the MacBook Air without increasing the weight and thickness or making it run hotter.

I don't believe it was possible to give the Mini a retina display while maintaining a 10 hour battery. Maybe the next one, but not the current one.

So the question is whether Apple should have waited with releasing the Mini or not, and that coimes down to whether you think Apple has the right to make money on something that doesn't meet your standards. The thing is a 6 hour Mini would not meet my standards in the same way that a non-retina Mini doesn't meet yours. Nor would a Mini that is thicker, heavier and runs hotter, and its already been shown that Apple can make a full sized Retina iPad that doesn't run noticibly hotter than the iPad 2.

In the end it's a simple thing, if the Mini doesn't meet your standards, don't buy it.

Sorry, I have to disagree. Colors are not on par with the retina iPad. They are on par with the iPad 2. There have already been tests on this and its obvious colors are not nearly as saturated as on the iPad 3/4. This is particularly noticeable on anything that is green or purple. The iTunes store icon for example looks obnoxiously undersaturated when comparing to the new iPad. And anything thats supposed to be green has a yellow tinge on the iPad mini/iPad2.

The mini only produces roughly 62% of the Adobe sRGB color spectrum while the iPad 3/4 product 95%+. Lets not get ahead of ourselves calling the iPad mini screen great. Its good not great. Colors are simply not as saturated.

http://www.displaymate.com/iPad_mini_ShootOut_1.htm

"The screen is good enough?" Really? Does CP usually rate something high that they determine is "good enough?"

And I disagree with their assessment of the screen. Colors are not on par with the retina models. I like the mini, but I don't have the balls to nearly say the screen is close to a retina iPad.

darngooddesign said:

This is flawed logic as you could also say that since Apple has so much money they could find a way of sticking a 512MB graphics card in the MacBook Air without increasing the weight and thickness or making it run hotter.

I don't believe it was possible to give the Mini a retina display while maintaining a 10 hour battery. Maybe the next one, but not the current one.

So the question is whether Apple should have waited with releasing the Mini or not, and that coimes down to whether you think Apple has the right to make money on something that doesn't meet your standards. The thing is a 6 hour Mini would not meet my standards in the same way that a non-retina Mini doesn't meet yours. Nor would a Mini that is thicker, heavier and runs hotter, and its already been shown that Apple can make a full sized Retina iPad that doesn't run noticibly hotter than the iPad 2.

In the end it's a simple thing, if the Mini doesn't meet your standards, don't buy it.

Click to expand...

it's not flawed logic at all, and we are essentially saying the same thing but there seems to be a misunderstanding.

using your example of a graphics card - i said that apple has so much money and resources that it would be capable of developing its own custom graphics card that would provide extra graphics capabilities in the MBA 11". it wouldn't be cost effective for them to do so, with margins in mind.

back to what i said - battery technology is far behind the rest of the tech world. i said that apple has so much money it could develop its own battery technology (not design the physical layout, but develop new battery technology) if it really wanted to. however as i said in my original post, it wouldn't be cost effective.

i apologize for the misunderstanding, but my post was in response to the many people in here who are criticizing apple for not including a retina display. i was reminding them of the reason behind apple's decisions on this product

jessica. said:

I like the mini, but I don't have the balls to nearly say the screen is close to a retina iPad.

Click to expand...

I certainly hope not since you're a girl

I know what you mean - good enough seems bad term to be used by CR in reviewing a product - its doesn't matter whether its an iPad or a nexus. They typically use satisfactory, unsatisfactory in their ratings and perhaps that should have been used.

I like my iPad mini but the screen is not a retina screen

maflynn said:

I certainly hope not since you're a girl

I know what you mean - good enough seems bad term to be used by CR in reviewing a product - its doesn't matter whether its an iPad or a nexus. They typically use satisfactory, unsatisfactory in their ratings and perhaps that should have been used.

I like my iPad mini but the screen is not a retina screen

Click to expand...

True, I have no balls. haha

Medic311 said:

back to what i said - battery technology is far behind the rest of the tech world. i said that apple has so much money it could develop its own battery technology (not design the physical layout, but develop new battery technology) if it really wanted to. however as i said in my original post, it wouldn't be cost effective.

Click to expand...

I have not yet seen another tablet that states that they have a battery that lasts up to 10 hours. The iPad mini battery was re-designed to be thinner and lighter so that it could fit into the case. It is the thinnest ad lightest battery Apple has developed, and yet it still has the battery life we have all come to expect. Up to 10 hours

kappaknight said:

Those other tablets are costing the companies money. The mini is making a profit. As a shareholder, I approve.

Click to expand...

Doubt that mini will have such a impact. At least where I am, people are going away from mini.

Medic311 said:

Regarding the iPad Mini 1st gen, the following 3 questions should be asked:

1) Was Apple capable of doing better? - yes
2) Should Apple have done better? -yes
3) Was it necessary for Apple to do better? - nope

#3 is why Apple didn't go "all-out" on the iPad Mini - they didn't have to. look how frustrating it has been to get an iPad Mini in a store, whether it's the Apple Store or Best Buy. why introduce new costs with higher resolution displays etc, when the focus point marketing studies already predicted how successful it would be (and predicted correctly). to top it off, Apple is selling every iPad Mini it gets in stock at the store. it wouldn't have made sense to introduce a Mini with higher costs.

#2 is just a personal opinion of mine, as they could have at least put a better resolution display in the Mini (maybe not Retina, but something in between)

#1 Apple has so much $$$ it could develop its own battery to meet the demands of Retina better

Click to expand...

Amazing to me how some folks can arm chair quarterback the iPad Mini. It's pretty tough to find folks returning their minis because 'Apple could've done better'

As you've said, they're impossible to find and sitting atop the 'Most Wanted' Christmas gift wish list of many.

Battery technology is and has been improving---and evolving. I do believe Apple is using some of that cash for energy R&D---as well as a plethora of 'other' design and engineering challenges. My Mini is well exceeding Apple's 10 hour mark! It's amazing how long it lasts on a single charge

As far as your assertion that Apple could've landed somewhere between Retina and Non---then you're talking about a new resolution...and app incompatibility. That makes NO sense!!

It will come---Apple won't rest on their collective asses and not continue to 'better' the display. At this time, the technology is just NOT available in the yields they would need to bring a retina display to market AND get it in the hands of the masses...They're having a helluva time just getting these current models out!!!

jonnyb098 said:

Sorry, I have to disagree. Colors are not on par with the retina iPad. They are on par with the iPad 2. There have already been tests on this and its obvious colors are not nearly as saturated as on the iPad 3/4. This is particularly noticeable on anything that is green or purple. The iTunes store icon for example looks obnoxiously undersaturated when comparing to the new iPad. And anything thats supposed to be green has a yellow tinge on the iPad mini/iPad2.

The mini only produces roughly 62% of the Adobe sRGB color spectrum while the iPad 3/4 product 95%+. Lets not get ahead of ourselves calling the iPad mini screen great. Its good not great. Colors are simply not as saturated.

http://www.displaymate.com/iPad_mini_ShootOut_1.htm

Click to expand...

I don't think CR went so far as to say the colors were the same...they said the display is 'good'---as did Anand in his very lengthy review---and as would I after owning it and the iPad 3 and 4. No, it doesn't match the color gamut of it's big brother--BUT it's as good or better than MOST consumer monitors and TVs we use each day. The retina iPads are truly and most likely the MOST accurate monitors folks that are buying the iPads have ever owned!!!

Most folks aren't investing in professional NEC color calibrated monitors...they're using the bundled monitors that came with their rig or one of the dozens of sub $300 monitors at Best Buy.

The mini's screen IS good---it's not a color correction monitor for grading RED Raw footage---but for casual use; surfing, movies & music, FB, Twitter, etc...it's just fine. I don't remember these complaints pre-retina...nor do I hear it from MBP owners that aren't retina fortified. If one needs to fill in the Adobe or sRGB gamut, they'll invest in a high end monitor---Most folks will never own such a display...unless they do buy into the retina gear. As it becomes more ubiquitous, folks will enjoy the saturation of colors....but right now, in this day n age of a 'non retina' optimized internet...it's not necessary to enjoy 99% of folks' daily computing task 'needs'

The mini is an excellent piece of engineering...I love mine, and have since purchased one for my folks and another for my son as Christmas gifts. This coming from an iPad 3 & 4 owner, as well as the 15" rMBP

J