iPad Mini: Second Thoughts About Retina

[ditzy]

Originally Posted by ItsWelshy

My 2 cents!

My missus has a iPad 3 with Retina, and I have an iPad mini and an iPad 2...

I love the retina display on her iPad 3, it truly is stunning, just like the rMBP, but for me, I think the iPad Mini is perfect, and I'm happy with the portability of the device.

Screen size and lightness of the iPad Mini is for me, the better option.

I dont know why this causes so much debate, all ourt lives are so different and we all have different needs and tastes.

Brilliant post!

[AppleRobert]

Originally Posted by DesertEagle

Today I had a real wake-up call about the tradeoffs between display quality and portability.

I went to an Apple store to compare an iPad 4 with an iPad Mini side-by-side. Only then I could tell the difference in pixel density at normal viewing distance. It's undeniable that on the iPad 4, graphics were more clear and vivid than on the iPad Mini (so there's no need for me to see an optometrist), but I did have to compare them next to each other to see it.

First, I held the iPad Mini, seeing how crisp the text was compared to on my iPad 2. Then I checked the iPad 4, and I felt how hot and heavy it was in comparison with the Mini. Then I also understood why the iPad 2 is still in sale, by the way. Looking close at the Mini again, I could see how the letters (at the smallest font sizes) were a little grainy; but holding it was so much more comfortable.


It seems unrealistic to me that any iPad (in the foreseeable future) will have retina-display and keep battery life constant, while not becoming significantly hotter and heavier during use. This gives me second thoughts about the necessity of retina display in the iPad Mini. Until Apple can provide it with retina display and keep the power consumption at today's level, I will probably prefer non-retina anyway.

Well if new nooks and kindle fires can basically do it, ......

And I'll add for cheaper!

[Defender2010]

Originally Posted by DesertEagle

Today I had a real wake-up call about the tradeoffs between display quality and portability.

I went to an Apple store to compare an iPad 4 with an iPad Mini side-by-side. Only then I could tell the difference in pixel density at normal viewing distance. It's undeniable that on the iPad 4, graphics were more clear and vivid than on the iPad Mini (so there's no need for me to see an optometrist), but I did have to compare them next to each other to see it.

First, I held the iPad Mini, seeing how crisp the text was compared to on my iPad 2. Then I checked the iPad 4, and I felt how hot and heavy it was in comparison with the Mini. Then I also understood why the iPad 2 is still in sale, by the way. Looking close at the Mini again, I could see how the letters (at the smallest font sizes) were a little grainy; but holding it was so much more comfortable.

It seems unrealistic to me that any iPad (in the foreseeable future) will have retina-display and keep battery life constant, while not becoming significantly hotter and heavier during use. This gives me second thoughts about the necessity of retina display in the iPad Mini. Until Apple can provide it with retina display and keep the power consumption at today's level, I will probably prefer non-retina anyway.

REAL wake up call. Just wow.
What may be "unrealistic" to you may not be to Apple, so nobody can really make these statements without first hand knowledge of the Apple roadmap for products/services.

[WilliamLondon]

Originally Posted by AppleRobert

Well if new nooks and kindle fires can basically do it, ......

And I'll add for cheaper!

And I'll take it away<grin> because you're doing the apples and oranges comparison. They sell those devices at cost and lock you into their stores - these companies aren't stupid or unsuccessful, you end up buying stuff from them and that's where they make their profit. These devices aren't cheaper, you just don't pay all the price for the product up front - they are clever and they eventually get their money, they just quietly slide it out of your wallet one note at a time without your ever realising what they're doing.

[smileyface]

Originally Posted by Philscbx

Who would actually Care about a gram or 2 extra -
no one is ever going to notice or give weight any factor into a purchase.

With my iPad1 in it's heavily guarded case -
would one notice the iPad4 difference slipped into the case?
can one tell the difference of weight of 8 AA's vs 7 AA's in their hand.

This is just too freakin weird to even consider -
Does the OS & View quality even Matter?



.

Well a gram or two yes but I doubt a battery with double the watt hours will be a gram or two lighter.The display on the retina requires almost double the power to light up compared with the non retina ipad 2.That's why the ipad 4 is so heavy.It's due to the massive battery required to operate the retina for 10+ hours.

Although the the ipad 4 is only 60g heavier than the ipad 2,you really do notice the difference in weight especially if you are going to hold it for the duration of a movie.I love my ipad 4 except for the weight.I thought it wouldn't matter but after using it for 2 weeks now,I am wishing for it to be 100g lighter.I just might sell it if the ipad 5 is significantly lighter.

Form factor matters these days.Consumers are spoiled by non stop improvement in technology and most people I know almost always talk about how light the ipad mini is before anything else and they love it.

[Bokes]

If Apple can't produce a higher resolution with good battery life- then how can a Barnes and noble- a bookseller- succeed with a 1440X900 with about 10 hours of battery use?

The screen on the NOOKHD is excellent.
honestly- why do some folks keep saying Apple can not raise the resolution on the mini due to a battery issue?

[smileyface]

Originally Posted by Bokes

If Apple can't produce a higher resolution with good battery life- then how can a Barnes and noble- a bookseller- succeed with a 1440X900 with about 10 hours of battery use?

The screen on the NOOKHD is excellent.
honestly- why do some folks keep saying Apple can not raise the resolution on the mini due to a battery issue?

The NOOK hd is a poor example.It is one inch smaller than the ipad mini,heavier,thicker and made of cheap light plastic...not to mention it is sluggish compared to the mini and has slightly less battery life.

The problem for Apple unless they want to go el cheapo build and poor performance like the Nook is that they must maintain it's current premium build/performance and form factor together with a retina display that will last 10 or 12 hours.

The IGZO display may allow that to happen.Time will tell.

[mpayne2k]

Originally Posted by WilliamLondon

And I'll take it away<grin> because you're doing the apples and oranges comparison. They sell those devices at cost and lock you into their stores - these companies aren't stupid or unsuccessful, you end up buying stuff from them and that's where they make their profit. These devices aren't cheaper, you just don't pay all the price for the product up front - they are clever and they eventually get their money, they just quietly slide it out of your wallet one note at a time without your ever realising what they're doing.

So it sounds like you're saying Apple purchasers are the real dopes because they pay more up front and Apple still wants you to use iTunes for all media on the device.

If you go by that logic it just makes Apple sound greedy.

But if you compare an iPad Mini to a Kindle Fire HD (7/8.9) or a Nexus 7 it is clearly a better built product which uses premium products when compared to the other devices.

----------

I guess I'll agree with the OPs feeling about the iPad Mini and Retina Display.

If you think of it, Apple needed to chose between two resolutions, either go with iPad/iPad 2 resolution and keep the device thin and fast while maintaining remarkable battery. Or go with Retina display resolution and compromise battery life or thinness.

They aren't going to pick a third resolution because Apps needed to scale properly and didn't want to further fragment the Apps available for their device line up.

I think it makes sense to pick the lower resolution of the iPad 2 as it still has a higher PPI than the first two iPads yet runs everything in a fast, efficient manner.

If (when?) they release the iPad Mini with Retina display I'll truly be congratulatory to Apple for keeping the battery life, efficiencey and thinness of the first generation model. That will be a work of miracles.

[Philscbx]

Originally Posted by smileyface

you really do notice the difference in weight especially if you are going to hold it for the duration of a movie.

That's the nuttiest thing ever - Holding a device the entire movie - lol.
Kick stands man - thats where it is. It gets better.

Hold & play a game w/o a stand cover on the Pad?
Not politically correct.

[Samtb]

Not many people complained about the lack of retina in ipad 2, so has retina just spoilt everyone?

[DesertEagle]

Originally Posted by Defender2010

REAL wake up call. Just wow.
What may be "unrealistic" to you may not be to Apple, so nobody can really make these statements without first hand knowledge of the Apple roadmap for products/services.

Yes, a REAL, genuine, bonafide wake up call, as opposed to all kinds of fake, spurious, mickey-mouse wake up calls... with or without the bugle

When I wrote about what was realistic, it was mainly with reference to what is even technically possible, and not what may or may not be Apple's plans or strategies. I should probably have made this more clear in the first place, but here it is anyway.

-------------

Originally Posted by Batavian

This was overblown by naysayers when the iPad 3 came out. Burning hands, use as a cup warmer, etc. it's a non issue.

Burning hands was a bit of a hyperbole, same goes for the cup warmer. But in my own hands-on experience (so to speak) with the iPad 4, the heat is absolutely an issue.

[jonnyb098]

I wish everyone would quit whining about heat and the iPad 4 getting warm. Of course its going to get warm. Its a dual core 1.4Ghz processor and quad-core graphics chip in a 9mm thick device! Need you be reminded how warm a MB Pro gets during standard use? (much warmer than an iPad 4) .

All of the sudden people have the same strength and skin sensitivities as a 3 month old.

[AppleRobert]

Originally Posted by WilliamLondon

And I'll take it away<grin> because you're doing the apples and oranges comparison. They sell those devices at cost and lock you into their stores - these companies aren't stupid or unsuccessful, you end up buying stuff from them and that's where they make their profit. These devices aren't cheaper, you just don't pay all the price for the product up front - they are clever and they eventually get their money, they just quietly slide it out of your wallet one note at a time without your ever realising what they're doing.

You do not have to buy anything from their store. And you get more ram and better resolution on the hd+ than the mini and a pretty good processor.

[iThinkergoiMac]

Originally Posted by DesertEagle

Let me add that even without comparing side-by-side, I have no problem to tell the pixel density of the iPad 2 from a retina-iPad. The way I see it however, it's different with iPad mini vs retina-iPad.

I guess it depends on the person. I've gotten used to the amazing display of my iPad 4 (got it about a week ago), and when I looked at my supervisor's iPad mini today at work, everything looked fuzzy to me.

So while you needed to see them side by side to see the difference, it was immediately apparent to me. Everyone is different. Retina is a must-have feature for me; because of my hearing loss (which is very mild), I rely on my eyes more than most, which makes the quality of a screen supremely important to me. Obviously, this isn't the case for everyone.

Still, Apple has managed to add a retina display and a bigger battery to maintain battery life, keep nearly the same size (it's smaller than the iPad 1 in all dimensions, especially in thickness), and make it lighter than the first generation iPad. There's no reason to suspect that it can't do the same with the mini. If the mini had retina, I almost certainly would have gotten it instead.

[WilliamLondon]

Originally Posted by AppleRobert

You do not have to buy anything from their store.

Irrelevant. This doesn't change their business model. They derive their profit off the stuff you buy from their (locked in) store post product sale.

Originally Posted by AppleRobert

And you get more ram and better resolution on the hd+ than the mini and a pretty good processor.

So what? They use less expensive build materials and build process (don't get me wrong, I've got a Kindle Paperwhite, just upgraded from my bog standard Kindle last week, and I'm approaching as much love with the new device as I had for my old one!), and I could come up with a bunch of other criteria where the mini will win. What's your point? There is more to a device than character etchings on a piece of silicon inside a device you'll never open.

Is the Kindle Fire HD a better device or the mini? I'm a mini owner, and I would say the mini betters matches my criteria, but I would never say the Kindle Fire HD is a piece of crap or something worthy of derision, that would be silly, because it's also a lovely device, just different.

[WestonHarvey1]

Originally Posted by DesertEagle

I know it's realistic. So when I write "in the foreseeable future" in this context, I mean that it will take no less than 2-3 years from now.

I haven't seen any evidence a 7.9 inch QXGA display panel exists, anywhere, from any manufacturer. Apple may not even have a prototype to test. Someone has to develop and tool up a whole process to produce a screen, they can't just one-off these things for a prototype.

There are higher DPI small screens, but they're the wrong size and aspect ratio i.e., the Kindle Fire HD's 7 inch WXGA. I've heard a lot of anger that Apple didn't use that display for the mini, which is absurd since the primary goal was that it be an iPad and that it run the same software, unmodified.

So I agree that we won't be seeing it any time soon - unless Sharp has been secretly producing a 7.9 inch QXGA IGZO panel.

[Che Castro]

All i know is The ipad mini 2 better not have ipad 3 specs

A5x

[Bokes]

Originally Posted by smileyface

The NOOK hd is a poor example.It is one inch smaller than the ipad mini,heavier,thicker and made of cheap light plastic...not to mention it is sluggish compared to the mini and has slightly less battery life.

The problem for Apple unless they want to go el cheapo build and poor performance like the Nook is that they must maintain it's current premium build/performance and form factor together with a retina display that will last 10 or 12 hours.

The IGZO display may allow that to happen.Time will tell.

I had the Nook HD for a trial- the weight and thickness is so darn close it's not an issue. I agree it is a tad sluggish. But as a pure reader that does a little extra- It's an excellent device. The screen is sweet and the battery lasted all day easy. I needed apps it doesn't offer yet. That's it's biggest downfall.

[iThinkergoiMac]

Originally Posted by Bokes

I had the Nook HD for a trial- the weight and thickness is so darn close it's not an issue. I agree it is a tad sluggish. But as a pure reader that does a little extra- It's an excellent device. The screen is sweet and the battery lasted all day easy. I needed apps it doesn't offer yet. That's it's biggest downfall.

Problem is, the iPad mini isn't a reader that does a little extra, is a mobile computing device, and it can be a reader too. The primary function of the Nook HD is a reader, the iPad mini's is a computing device. They serve different purposes, so you can't really directly compare the two.

[smileyface]

The size alone is no comparison.The Nook maybe almost the same weight and size but it's 7in display has 40% less real estate than the mini's 7.9in.The mini will need a 40% bigger battery if they have the same pixel density.

Also the premium build of the mini feature aluminium which of course is going to be heavier than cheap plastic.

If they feature the new IGZO display in the mini 2,they may get a retina without increasing weight.The problem is IGZO is a new technology and there might be bugs.

[Captain America]

Originally Posted by WilliamLondon

And I'll take it away<grin> because you're doing the apples and oranges comparison. They sell those devices at cost and lock you into their stores - these companies aren't stupid or unsuccessful, you end up buying stuff from them and that's where they make their profit. These devices aren't cheaper, you just don't pay all the price for the product up front - they are clever and they eventually get their money, they just quietly slide it out of your wallet one note at a time without your ever realising what they're doing.

Not necessarily true. You could just as easily pick up a Nook and install Cyanogenmod on it, then voila, you have yourself a good Android tablet.

[WilliamLondon]

Originally Posted by Captain America

Not necessarily true. You could just as easily pick up a Nook and install Cyanogenmod on it, then voila, you have yourself a good Android tablet.

Are you listing an exception and claiming the business model of these companies isn't what it is? Exceptions are merely that, exceptions. Their business model is what it is.

[AppleRobert]

Originally Posted by WilliamLondon

Are you listing an exception and claiming the business model of these companies isn't what it is? Exceptions are merely that, exceptions. Their business model is what it is.

What is the difference what their business model is? You buy the tablet and nothing else, so what profit are they deriving afterwards?

And everyone knows theirs = fail.

[WilliamLondon]

Originally Posted by AppleRobert

What is the difference what their business model is? You buy the tablet and nothing else, so what profit are they deriving afterwards?

And everyone knows theirs = fail.

It has everything to do with how they price the thing and one of the main reasons it's so much less expensive than Apple's products. This all started because you argued that because a Nook and Kindle has something an Apple product doesn't *for cheaper* that Apple should be including it, because they do it for cheaper. That was your argument. I merely pointed out that they price their products cheaper for a reason (business models), and they end up getting their profit later. That's the relevance here. See?

[CNeufeld]

Personally, I don't carea about retina vs. non-retina, when it comes to a mini. What I do care about is how washed out the colors are on my mini vs. my iPad 3. For example, the same game displayed on both screens, the iPad 3 is MUCH more vivid. If they just put in a better quality display with the same resolution, I'd be fine. And I'd rather keep the same size of the unit rather than bulking it up to handle a retina display.

Clint